“lesser of two evils” is something I can’t easily argue with. The only place to go with it is, are we really capable of discerning that from two evils, or is it an excuse to vote how we would anyway? Is it anything different from acceptance of the status quot?

Flu’s point, “limit change as much as possible”, is also interesting( probably why I limit my revolutionary activities to not voting and how I “get and spend”). “Status quot” is also prone to being used for convenience by the current batch of “winners”.

It does seem easy to find examples or “proof” of this idea of the destructiveness of change, over any improvements that come of it. Even in our lifetimes there are many examples,domestically and internationally, from which experience could be drawn to lend support.

A full fledged “non-political” orientation is starting to have more complete appeal to me. I have met many older people who eventually did this and were probably better off for it.It’s less angry and no more powerless than voting in the current system. Of course, if it really caught on that would be a “change”.