I was tryiig to get across that anarchists don’t “prefer” any party, if they have the alternative of not focusing on electoralism. That’s not a non-sequitur, that’s correcting a lacking representation of aiarchists.
Anarchists usually also prefer liberal democracy over a feudal system. But stopping at that statement would also misrepresent anarchists.
Preference is relative. In a binary choice, the less bad option is preferred. This was the clear message of the comment you replied to.
Your reply neither refuted this, nor effectively communicated the message you’re currently on. All it does is imply that anarchists benefit in some way from ignoring elections.
I was tryiig to get across that anarchists don’t “prefer” any party, if they have the alternative of not focusing on electoralism. That’s not a non-sequitur, that’s correcting a lacking representation of aiarchists.
Anarchists usually also prefer liberal democracy over a feudal system. But stopping at that statement would also misrepresent anarchists.
Preference is relative. In a binary choice, the less bad option is preferred. This was the clear message of the comment you replied to.
Your reply neither refuted this, nor effectively communicated the message you’re currently on. All it does is imply that anarchists benefit in some way from ignoring elections.
As I said: just because you don’t want to engage, doesn’t mean that it’s a non-sequitur.
As I said, it’s not a non sequitur because I’m not engaging, I’m not engaging because is a non sequitur. It’s a very simple concept.
You keep telling yourself that you’re not making excuses for not engaging. /s