I suppose my language could use more precision, despite the delightful alliteration of "voting is violence." There is a distinction to be drawn between initiating coercive force against peaceful people, the use of proportionate force against someone who initiates aggression.
I know a lot of folks recommend "defensive voting" on local ballot initiatives where a single vote is not statistically equivalent to zero. However, voting for a politician who has promised a given policy means voting for the violence necessary to fund and enforce it, if voting works as we were all taught in civics class.
Bernie in 2016, Ron Paul in 2012, and so many other people have been crushed by the party imposing their insiders against any internal disruptive elements. The duopoly is a self-perpetuating machine as it divides and conquers.