![[REPOST] "Harm reduction" has a specific meaning, and people are misusing the term](https://i.ibb.co/7GxNPCN/harm.png){kind=link}
Highlighting an essential defining part of the term “harm reduction” so that no one misses this:
and yes, there is a part of harm reduction that is aimed at not moralizing about the behavior that you’re trying to reduce harm from. but if you’re a progressive - as most of the people lecturing us about “harm reduction” purport to be - you should already understand that these behaviors are not ethically bad in and of themselves. it is not inherently unethical to use drugs or be sexually active as a teen, so the fact that harm reduction efforts could “encourage” that behavior is also not unethical! if you think that it is, then you’re actually a conservative!
Obviously, this would not apply to, say, a fucking genocide
This is true, and thank you for bringing this up! I’ve been wanting to share a post about this.
People who voted third-party are a very small slice of the pie. Democrats use third-party voters (and really any group that doesn’t conform to its very narrow window of what they consider acceptable behavior – e.g., people who express valid criticism for candidates – though that’s a separate post) as an excuse, but their failures in elections rests entirely on them.