It’s as simple as this: I don’t look at politics as something that can save us. HOWEVER, I do realize that it can destroy us.
Thus the logical snafu that many on FR make when they refuse to vote for “the lesser of two evils” - because almost all of them are the folks who also warn us that “politics cannot save us” - is that of course politics is the lesser of two evils by definition. That’s why it cannot save us, but why it certainly CAN destroy us.
I don’t like lesser of two evils...but if the lesser of two evils does not destroy us, or gives us more time to prepare while it does destroy us, then it is still the proper stewardship of a vote by any Biblical definition or secular logical one.
Theres your problem right there. You ignore the destruction going on daily perped by the very lesser evils you are willing to elect more of.
See Bhomer/Lindsay/McColnell for further details.
Once you equate their actions to the problems that result from them, Stevie Wonder could see it at 1000 yards.
The only logical inference to your position (politics cannot save us, but it can destroy us), is to make anything political as toothless and irrelevant as possible. Or to put it more succinctly, deconstruct the government to such a level that vilest conceivable leader has no way of “destroying” anything or anyone. Along with that, is a presumption that voting would be about as meaningless an exercise as it now, but for completely different reasons.
This is not a potential reality within the system as it stands. The vessel needs to be sunk and a new vessel built to replace it.