this post was submitted on 07 Apr 2026
463 points (80.7% liked)
Political Memes
11582 readers
2525 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This is your central flaw. It doesn't. The winner still gets sworn in, they still choose their cabinet, they still enact their policies. Life goes on without your input.
That also happens when a banana republic has an election with over 100% turnout lol The fact that a dictatorship holds elections and then does stuff doesn't make it a democracy.
What does that have to do with my point?
In response to my point that voter turnout legitimizes democracy, you point out that elections lead to winners who go ahead and govern, regardless of turnout...and that means the results are legitimate. Which is wrong.
If you think democracy (rule by the people) means anything, then whether the system gets input from people or not clearly matters. Only fascists think that power is the only legitimacy. So, despite their "elections," and despite the fact that the winners go on to govern, if the population does not turn up to vote, elections are not democratic. Whether that's because the people have no faith in the system, or because of state repression doesn't really matter...the people cannot be said to be ruling that state. Showing up to vote legitimizes the system, and not showing up delegitimizes it.
The CIA-backed opposition parties in countries the US doesn't like call for boycotts. Opposition parties to CIA-backed leaders of banana republics call for boycotts. If it's not a thing...why do you think they're all doing that?
So? That's not a mechanism that overturns the result. There's nothing in the Constitution that says " If enough voters boycott the election, the result is illegitimate and new candidates must be chosen".
"Legitimacy" is a functionally meaningless term here. It has exactly zero effect on the material outcome. It's not a real thing that means anything outside your head.
So it's meaningless to say Russia's a legitimate democracy and putin is the legitimate democratically elected leader? Batista was in Cuba too, I guess...he held elections. The July 26 movement (and others) boycotted them because they were just dumb...they shoulda just voted harder! They just didn't understand that democratic legitimacy doesn't matter. Maybe they should have circulated a petition to stop the slavery and torture and stuff.
I don't know what the material effect of the lack of faith in the electoral system caused by these parties getting less and less interested in pretending the US is a democracy will be...but it's not inside my head, man. The rest of the world (and history) are paying attention. Other countries are (and should be) distancing themselves from the United States.
It's as though you think Almighty God handed down the Constitution of the United States as immutable laws of the universe. As though the only thing that matters is which flavor of asshole is sitting on the throne.
The constitution only lays out the rules of the game, but if the game is bullshit, the game is bullshit. Should we change the rules of the game? Should we keep playing the game? What do I do when the rules of the game are not fair? What do I do when if the rules are fair but another player is pointing a gun at me? Questions like this cannot be answered by the rules of the game.
Something that actually accomplishes a change in some way. Boycotting an election isn't that.
As you may have picked up from reading my comment, the question you quoted was not a question I was asking you, it was part of a list of questions that cannot be answered by the constitution. There is not a short and sweet answer to questions like that.
A blanket statement that boycotting an election doesn't accomplish change in some way is such a wild take. Have you ever read anything that wasn't part of the state's mandatory victorious history of the empire for children? I'm sure you have, you seem like a bright person...so what the hell are you talking about?
Just answer this: why did anti-apartheid groups in south africa boycott elections, rejecting the government's "reform" strategy? You're saying it's because they're fools, and I think that's because you're not applying any critical thinking whatsoever. Maybe you don't mean what you said, and mean something more specific.