Norway has a parliamentary election this Monday (the voting has been open for a month), and as so often, it brings up the topic of ideological purity versus pragmatism.
In Norway, parties that get more than 4% of the votes are rewarded with extra seats, and this year, the Green Party is at that limit. The traditional liberal and conservative blocks are close in size, so whether the Greens get more or less than 4% can determine the outcome of the election.
I have three parties I can vote for without holding my nose. I obviously don’t agree with every policy of all of those parties, but it doesn’t matter. They are close enough, and since all of them are relatively small, I vote for whatever one is at risk to go below 4%. This year, it was the Green Party. (Which I also happen to be a member of.)
Other years, it has been one of the other two. And IF another party on the liberal (red-green) side was close to 4%, and whether they go above or below could determine the outcome of the whole election, I would vote for that one, even if it would mean voting for a party I agree with less.
To me, it’s more important that the liberal coalition wins than that I personally get some kind of satisfaction in the voting booth. I am more than happy to hold my nose slightly in the voting booth, and have four more years with a coalition I generally agree with. (Or, at least, don’t strongly disagree with.)
The perfect is the enemy of the good. I see the value of voting for exactly the party you agree with the most, although for me, it’s not worth it if it risks a loss for the coalition as a whole.
In reality, I don’t see any party going far enough, apart from possibly the Greens. By far, the most crucial topic in our age is to avoid going further into global ecological overshoot (which means ecocide and suicide, ecological and civilizational collapse), and to create a deeply regenerative civilization. We are very far from that, and no party really even talk about it apart from some within the Green Party.