nsrxn

https://bonfirenetworks.org/

http://campground.bonfire.cafe/

I said what I meant: voting is not harm reduction, and voting for Harris didn't reduce any harm

How does anti-electoralism prevent alternatives from gaining traction?

I didn't say it does. you are arguing with a strawman

I think you should just read what you wrote. you seem to be able to put the words in the right order, without understanding what they mean.

voting Harris didn't reduce any harm, but it did prevent real alternatives from gaining traction.

bacteria, fungus, plants, protozoa, and (arguably) viruses are all alive, too. bed bugs. rattlesnakes. being alive isn't actually that special, nor a reason, in itself, to refrain from eating or killing that thing.

i know but there is definitely a double entendre in there.

harm reduction has a specific meaning, and voting is not harm reduction

guilt-framed

you shouldn't treat animals like smartphones, either. you treat different things differently.

there must be some difference, since they didn't get the same result