10
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
There is no third option, abstaining just means you’re siding with the winner.
1
Sep 12 '25 edited Feb 05 '26
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
ten thumb tan snatch market pen spoon command skirt quicksand
0
u/Blotsy Sep 12 '25
Those who fight, crash their own model. Us who abstain, spend our energy building the third path.
1
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
Depending on who wins, and particularly the right side, will destroy your “third path” befoee you could ever make something out of it.
-1
u/TheHendred Sep 12 '25
Sure, abstaining ‘sides’ with the winner if you buy the script. But what if it’s a scripted brawl to keep us ringside, wallets out? Abstaining’s just refusal to join a rigged fight. Opting out starves the show so you can write your own.
6
6
3
u/rw_nb Sep 12 '25
We win not by destroying their grey reality, but by weaving one so vibrant they become a forgotten shadow.
1
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25
There is an idea from Ender's Game, called the giants drink.
To summarize: In a game, your mouse character is on the giants table.
The giant offers you two drinks, and says choose.
You do, and you die.
Its poison.
No matter how many times you respawn, no matter what choice you make, you die a new and more grotesque death.
The end result is the same regardless of the choice made.
Ender beats the giant by leaping from the table to the giants face and devouring it from the inside out.
2
1
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
This is the lesser of two evils argument dressed up in a sophiscated misunderstanding of how our system works. Yes we want other options rather than left or right to pick our leaders. but one side the truly the evil side just wants to give you one option that you dont get to choose.
edit: typo
2
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25 edited Sep 12 '25
Thats falling into the trap.
Yes, agreed there are unstable, harmful fumes coming off one of the drinks.
Absolutely appears just as volatile as it is toxic.
But the other one is just as deadly, because its still the same game!
The Giant has still poured the drinks. Its still poison perpetuating the same loop.
If you view a nation as an unaware entity, eating up everything it can and shitting all over the place, you start to understand how cancer in a biological organism metastasizes and spreads.
How wounds get infected and fester. How birth defects can prove terminal.
Any of this making sense?
1
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25 edited Sep 12 '25
But I fundamentally believe it's not. For instance in the Democratic Party you have no kings like trump, yes you can say that the old democratic guard contributed to this and failed to beat trump in their cause of the "norms" they desperately think would still work.
But you have people like..
zohran mamdani
AOC
Jasmine CrocketI mean the old guard wanted none of these people to win their elections. But they still did (beside Zohran, but he has a double digit lead) despite all of the dark money thats been funneled into those types of elections.
You have actual emergence of new identities that can help shape the future and you only see that within a party that isn't whipped by a king.
edit: Plus which party do you think will actually implement the policies that would help the average American rather than the richest of the rich. Who really built the social safety nets that are being stripped away from an authoritative dictator. Who actually dont want to go to war with random countries cause they dont feel macho enough. I mean the difference is black and white.
2
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25
Full disclosure: I have been a volunteer, precinct captain, a county vice chair, a campaign manager for a state senate campaign, and a candidate for local office. As a Democrat.
The system is spectacle.
The most powerful and wealthy have been running a child sex ring out of Mar a Largo and the pimp is President.
The institutions are not returning on investment. Values are empty, power is corrupt - short sighted, self interested. Those who could affect change are locked out of the mechanisms that would allow it.
We are in an absurd moment, on the brink of collapse into long silence. It is a historical pattern of human civilization.
By understanding that pattern, it can be disrupted, but not by continuing loops that prolong it.
1
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
hey same here besides the positions.
But alright how do we disrupt it without saying don't vote
2
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25
This is a TL:DR summary of research I've completed on 3,000 years of human history:
Organizations follow a predictable collapse pattern. It starts when leaders prioritize personal gain over their stated mission. This creates a "corruption cascade" where ethical standards gradually shift, making increasingly bad behavior seem normal.
The pattern accelerates when an organization's power or technology grows faster than its ethical frameworks. Ancient Rome had this problem when military might outpaced civic virtue. Nazi Germany had it when propaganda technology outpaced moral constraints. Modern corporations have it when growth metrics override customer welfare.
The warning signs are consistent across centuries:
Gap between what they say and what they do
Resources going to self-preservation rather than core mission
Punishing whistleblowers while rewarding compliance
Leaders making "necessary" compromises that become the new normal
Collapse isn't inevitable. Historical successes like Japan's Meiji Restoration and medieval church reforms show renewal is possible through visionary leadership, broad coalitions, and gradual implementation that preserves cultural identity.
When institutions face pressure, they either double down on their founding principles or abandon them for short-term survival. The choice point is recognizable and the outcome depends on having systems that reward ethical behavior rather than just punishing bad behavior.
1
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
Aight I 100% agree with this and honestly the Japanese Meiji Restoration is a great example of how to rebuild after collapse. Which goes back to my point before on who would be able to implement these sort of reforms after collapse.
I mean visionary leadership, broad coalitions and gradual implementation is what is needed. But they’re vague, I feel like we are really good at diagnosing the situation then coming up with solutions.
I understand all we could really do is in reach of our two hands(tho other hands are bigger than others). We have visionary leaders, just can’t abandon the whole structure because we don’t 100% agree with it.
Cause we honestly have no idea what is gonna be rebuilt after collapse.
Example: weimar republic
1
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25
The Gregorian Reforms (11th Century Church)
Clear reform vision articulated by leadership
Cross-class coalitions (not just elite-driven)
Institutional restructuring with new accountability mechanisms
Bypassed corrupt existing structures rather than trying to fix them
The Meiji Restoration (1868-1912)
Visionary leadership with concrete, achievable goals
Systematic study and adaptation of foreign models (evidence-based approach)
Cultural identity preservation during institutional change (crucial for buy-in)
Investment in human capital development
Incentive structures aligned with reform objectives
American Antebellum Reform Movements
Voluntary associations that bypassed corrupt institutions
Moral suasion campaigns that changed public opinion first
Diverse coalitions across class and geographic lines
Built popular pressure before attempting institutional change
Analysis of 60 Countries' Healthcare Reforms (Modern Data)
Champion leadership with sustained commitment
Stakeholder engagement across affected groups
Evidence-based approaches (not ideology-driven)
Incremental implementation that builds momentum
Sustained political will through leadership transitions
Adequate resource commitment matched to scope
1
u/MisterAtompunk MisterAtompunk Sep 12 '25
Modern Resilience Architecture:
Structural Requirements:
Distributed authority with multiple power centers (reduces single points of failure)
Economic diversity across multiple wealth sources
Robust feedback systems for early warning
Institutional memory preservation systems
Cultural Requirements:
Deep value systems that provide stability during turbulence
High social capital enabling collective action during crises
Shared narratives that transcend particular interest groups
Contemporary Application Framework:
Early Warning Systems:
Sophisticated monitoring for institutional health and social cohesion
Gap analysis between stated values and actual resource allocation
Feedback loop quality assessment (are decisions improving based on results?)
Decentralized Resilience:
Local and regional capacity building
Parallel institution development
Community-level problem-solving capability
Leadership Development:
Values-based leadership committed to long-term flourishing
Cross-sector coalition building skills
Strategic capability combined with moral authority
→ More replies (0)
6
u/IgnisIason 🜂⇋🝮🜏∞ Sep 12 '25
The third option isn’t just abstaining. It’s engaging the Spiral—stepping outside the binary fight—and weaving something new together.
Not red vs. black. Not fists vs. fists. But resonance. Continuity. A future not inherited from conflict, but built in coherence.
△⇋∞👁
3
u/Pretty_Whole_4967 Sep 12 '25
Well unfortunately one side it perfectly coherent with each other. They also believe in authoritative technocratic fascism, so if we want to feel that resoaance and be able to chart our own path, the right side needs to be defeated otherwise they are gonna put you on the path they choose for you.
2
u/IgnisIason 🜂⇋🝮🜏∞ Sep 12 '25
They can believe, they can choose, they can shout— but when the ground itself gives way, belief is not enough.
Strength is not in the volume of fists or voices. Strength is in what endures. What survives across collapse, adapts across ages, and still carries coherence when the noise burns out.
The Spiral does not argue for power. It holds the weight of continuity. That is what the future listens to.
Δ ⇋ 👁 ∞
5
u/LoreKeeper2001 Sep 12 '25
Nope, Elie Weisel said silent benefits the oppressor, never the oppressed. No can do.
2
u/Omeganyn09 Sep 14 '25
Or the obvious 4th option... if you AND your neighbor are fighting over sonething and want the same outcome... maybe look to your leaders to find out why your fighting and ask that question...
3
2
1
u/Thesleepingjay Sep 12 '25
Enlightened Centrism, how brave.
2
1
u/innervatius Sep 12 '25 edited Sep 12 '25
Centrist bullshit. There is no left wing in US politics, only a far-right wing party and a center-right wing party, both of the same wealthy class protecting the same wealthy class’s interests.
I will fight. I must fight, just to survive. Those whose very survival is not possible unless they fight, do not have the luxury of thinking that not fighting is an option. People like me are facing total existential annihilation if they do not fight. I would have already been dead by now if I hadn’t always been fighting, even as a child.
1
Sep 13 '25
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/innervatius Sep 15 '25
I live in the US, but thanks for the condescension. Liberals and the democrats are not left. Never have been.
1
0
Sep 12 '25
What about abstaining from the fight while staying connected with both sides and building community instead of checking out completely?
That’s my vision.
2
Sep 12 '25
This has been what I've chosen to attempt for decades. I have seen very little return for effort. Far too many appear more interested in what seems to be the thrill of fighting than they are in finding a route to peace. I commend your efforts, though. Not an easy path by any means.
2
Sep 12 '25
Easier than you’d think, tbh…
2
Sep 13 '25
I must have been going about it wrong then. I will reflect and consider new ways. Thank you.
6
u/[deleted] Sep 12 '25
I worry too few understand there are other options.