Responding To The No Politician Is Perfect, Go With The One You Agree With The Most, Of The Establishment Arguement.

Establishment supporters argue with me, trying to make the case of:

"No politician is perfect, go with the one you agree with the most, of the establishment."

Their argument maintains the supposed 'Two-Party System.' Promotes 'Lesser Evil' voting and appealing to pragmatism, using gear of 'Wasted Votes.'

I counter that voting establishment and some times green party (US) compromising core values. Perpetuates the status quo, keeps some just comfortable enough not to complain about the systematic problems of others. Lacks of real choice and enabling elitism; while ignorong the fact that the lesser of two evils, is still evil, and sometimes there is still a good choice available. 

There argument is particularly problematic. It would require compromise on fundamental principles and to support a system that one fundamentally opposed. Why it's highly unlikely i'd find a significant difference that aligns with my views. Any differences between their platforms are likely to be within the margins of that capitalist system, not a departure from it. Policy differences between them will likely be within the realm of moderate reforms or regression, not the radical transformation.

Their core economic and political philosophies are largely aligned and their differences are superficial. The "lesser evil" obscures the fact that both options are still fundamentally opposed to my core beliefs. Their differences are primarily within the context of a system I fundamentally reject, and I would find a substantial difference with a party that alligns with my ideologies.

From fundamental economic differences with the U.S. system to social and cultural disparities, political philosophy, and environmental views, I, like most leftists, am highly incompatible with the Democratic Party and nearly completely incompatible with the Republican Party. The two parties perceive me as an extreme member of the opposing side because they are elitists who believe only their parties matter. They are mostly too far gone and refuse to accept the following as truth about myself and similar leftists:

My strong alignment with communism, Marxism-Leninism, and anti-capitalism represents a complete rejection of the capitalist economic system that both major parties uphold. While Democrats and Republicans publicly claim to have different approaches to regulating capitalism, they both fundamentally support it.

While the Democratic Party claims to be more progressive on social issues, my radical humanist, social justice, and egalitarian views are far more extreme than the mainstream Democratic platform. The Republican Party's socially regressive positions are diametrically opposed to my views on issues like women's rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and multiculturalism.

My support for revolutionary socialism and radicalism indicates a willingness to embrace significant social and political upheaval, which is in opposition to the incremental change favored by both major parties. The establishment parties prefer to maintain the status quo, while I seek to abolish it.

While the Democratic Party's platform may include environmental protection, my green politics are far more radical than the mainstream Democratic Party is willing to consider. The Republican Party is known for its lack of environmental concerns.

I identify as a hive-mind collectivist international-communist (or at least, that's what I call myself as I continue to learn). Others have described me as a hybrid Maoist-Stalinist, suggesting I don't quite fit with either group. But I am definitely not in support of the Western establishment parties, their cultish politicians, or comfortable voting base; between the three of these, they are the primary drivers of my activist-misanthropy as described by Ian James Kidd.