I think it's a tragedy of the commons–like scenario. (If not in reverse.)
I don't think you'll end up with any satisfying answers to the question "How is a consequentialist to vote?" at the individual level, because the entire system is setup such that it doesn't place too much value in any single person's vote. That's by design.
Like others have said, if everyone decided that they're single vote didn't matter enough to case, then no one would vote. You'd end up in a tragedy of the commons where individual, potential extreme, opinions would become much more powerful than they already are. (Can't remember where I was reading this, but there is already research on how small-but-vocal minorities can have an outsized effect.)
In a counter-intuitive way, the benefit to voting is actually that you are decreasing the impact of any one individual's vote. And by doing so, you're helping to ensure that popular opinion is what actually elects leaders.
(Of course this is all based on the democratic system, and the belief that the majority opinion should be what governs, which you have to buy into in the first place to value voting.)
It's probably more helpful to ask something like, "What happens when larger and larger of people vote in specific ways?", potentially even at the issue-specific level if you want to maximize your individual effect. But even then, you'll probably have more impact convincing a group of friends to vote alongside you than by contorting your own single vote.
I think it's a tragedy of the commons–like scenario. (If not in reverse.)
I don't think you'll end up with any satisfying answers to the question "How is a consequentialist to vote?" at the individual level, because the entire system is setup such that it doesn't place too much value in any single person's vote. That's by design.
Like others have said, if everyone decided that they're single vote didn't matter enough to case, then no one would vote. You'd end up in a tragedy of the commons where individual, potential extreme, opinions would become much more powerful than they already are. (Can't remember where I was reading this, but there is already research on how small-but-vocal minorities can have an outsized effect.)
In a counter-intuitive way, the benefit to voting is actually that you are decreasing the impact of any one individual's vote. And by doing so, you're helping to ensure that popular opinion is what actually elects leaders.
(Of course this is all based on the democratic system, and the belief that the majority opinion should be what governs, which you have to buy into in the first place to value voting.)
It's probably more helpful to ask something like, "What happens when larger and larger of people vote in specific ways?", potentially even at the issue-specific level if you want to maximize your individual effect. But even then, you'll probably have more impact convincing a group of friends to vote alongside you than by contorting your own single vote.