Free Keene

Peaceful Evolution

If You Vote, You Can’t Complain

Filed under: Anarchy in Your Head — dalebert at 12:00 am on Wednesday, October 15, 2008

We’re all familiar with the expression “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain.” I take issue with that. It’s 1984 double-speak to me. We, the peasants, are presented with this extremely infinitesimal chance to influence the choice from an extremely small selection of masters, the choices having essentially already been picked by the elite. We then play the game and we are permitted to complain about the results knowing full well the rules and the stakes beforehand. Excuse me? That sounds like very poor sportsmanship.

I don’t accept the rules or the stakes. I don’t want to be a slave under either McCain or Obama and I don’t appreciate others taking it upon themselves to pick who will be my master. Having an infinitesimal chance of influencing a choice of two masters does not make me feel the slightest bit free. Even if I had the only vote and could pick one of the two, that would not make me feel less a slave.

There are quite a lot of fair weather fans of our democratic republic. Complainers have been saying Bush wasn’t really elected ever since SCOTUS settled the controversial vote count in Florida. To those I ask if they’re losing faith in the checks and balances between the three branches of government that the founding fathers of the federal government of the U.S. put into place to keep tyranny in check. Are you? Good! Run with that. Maybe you’re onto something.

I understand the viewpoint of those who don’t approve of that process but they participate as a sort of defensive measure because they know the results are going to impact them regardless. I used to be in that camp as recently as the Ron Paul campaign. I have thoughts on that both from a moral point of view and from a practical point of view but I’m going to focus on the practical side of withdrawing from politics. I know those who continue to “vote defensively” are following their consciences and doing what they feel is best. I don’t feel it’s productive to continually harp on that subject, but I’ll address that in more detail another time. I want this to be a positive and inspirational message about what other things we can do.

Yesterday I participated with three other Keeniacs in a great voluntaryist outreach effort at a Howard Dean voter registration rally at Keene State. We had some great responses, along with a few not so friendly responses which is to be expected anytime you have something to say about a controversial subject. We were there to give an alternate viewpoint to the voter registration rally, and invite people to try other methods of effecting change in a  peaceful way.

We’ll be having a similar effort on election day at some key voting locations around Keene, and hopefully in some other locations around New Hampshire if other NH residents are inspired by this. I’m hoping to encourage others to engage in similar outreach efforts around the country. That’s why I’m writing this now to give people some time to plan. I’ll be posting fliers on my blog that you can print out with summarized information about the violence inherent in politics.

Many people seem to think I don’t want to impact politics. That couldn’t be further from the truth. Like all “small-L” libertarians, I see politics as force backed by the the threat of violence, which is the opposite of freedom, and I absolutely want to see a substantial reduction in the impact of politics on our personal lives. However, to do this effectively, I must recognize politics as the enemy.

Recognize that an authoritarian government’s greatest weapon against us is not guns and violence. Their greatest weapons are their illusions. They’ve been fabricating illusions of authority ever since the days of the divine right of kings, where kings were considered to have the backing of God himself to justify their rule. With these illusions on their side, regular people turn aside as they commit acts that would be considered criminal by the hand of any “normal” person. The looters want us to play their political games. If you’ve read that horribly written novel with a fantastic premise, Atlas Shrugged, then you’ll recall all the attempts by the looters, as she refers to them, to get the victims to sanction their behavior. This is what the hamster wheel of politics is all about. Most of the looters believe in these illusions themselves, so I’m not claiming a conspiracy. It’s the nature of the beast. Anyone willing to use violence for personal gain can benefit from government and hence from these illusions, so it’s in their personal interest to maintain them. The more they truly convince themselves of the validity of these illusions, the less cognitive dissonance they feel when they engage in their violent enslavement of humanity. Politicians are themselves not even that high on the hierarchy of masters. Look to who contributes to their campaigns and otherwise invests in government force to see who commands the politicians and therefore also has an interest in maintaining the illusions.

When I choose not to vote, it’s just a small first step. I’m speaking out against the process itself and it seriously muddles my message if I engage in the process while speaking out against it. But I still have the potential to impact the process from outside of it. Anarchy or voluntaryism is not a binary all-or-nothing strategy. We can make progress toward liberty right now. Consider a viral message against the process itself and the positive impact that could have on political decisions.

Most people don’t like either candidate’s position, but are voting for the lesser evil as a sort of damage control. The candidate positions get more alike each election. There’s a reason that happens. With extremely few choices presented to us by the elite, the deciding votes are by swing voters. Those swing voters have more power than anyone. All a candidate has to do to keep their base is not be as horrible as the other candidate. Their base voters will fall into line with simple fear tactics. In the last presidential election, we were told Kerry was rated most liberal senator by some group. Notice that Obama is now the most liberal senator? Do you recall the “Anyone but Bush” campaign? Do you now see the “McSame- Same as Bush” signs? These tactics keep them from having to take strong, principled positions that would turn off swing voters, like pulling out of Iraq quickly or equalizing the dramatically graduated Marxist tax system or making some kind of substantial change to the social security system.

Imagine if people started proclaiming loudly that they’ve lost faith in the political system. Government needs our sanction for their illusions. Politicians need our votes to win elections. If that message starts to go viral, they have to fight that message. They have to start working to counter that message, and kudos if they do! If they start acting more principled to keep people believing in the system so they’ll vote, campaign, and contribute, then we’ve made progress. We’ve actually held politicians at least somewhat accountable without lifting a finger in violence, without ganging up with our buddies in an attempt to overpower those who disagree with us, but simply by being very vocally and loudly passive. We actually begin to lead a growing block of potential swing voters. A vote lost is as bad as a vote gained by the competitor, and maybe they will try to win some of those non-voters back. It won’t work on those like myself, but perhaps on some it may, if a politician starts to show a backbone.

What about third party candidates? They come and go, as do the parties themselves. The Libertarian party is in its death throes because it gave up its principles in an attempt to win the corrupt game of politics. Ideas are immortal. Our candidate sticks around and can gain momentum every election. Nobody for president, 2008!

So I say to you, don’t vote, but do complain. Complain very loudly and convince others to complain with you. Complain that the system itself is unacceptable and produces horrible candidates. Maybe you don’t share my anti-government sentiments, and that’s okay. Maybe you’ll agree with me later, but in the meantime, don’t vote for a lesser evil. Hold your votes and your contributions hostage until someone offers you a viable candidate with a spine. Make the candidates listen, not to apathetic couch surfers, but to principled and passionate non-voters.

Fliers have now been posted on my blog for outreaches so feel free to download those and alter them to your tastes unless you prefer to make your own fliers. I’ll also be posting a YouTube Vlog entry so check in a day or two or just subscribe to my YouTube channel and you’ll be notified when that’s up. In the meantime, enjoy these comics on voting.

Passing the Buck

Vote for Change 2008

I Choose You!

10 Comments »

Comment by Slim Richey

October 15, 2008 @ 1:41 am

Well, I was writing an article on this same subject. I was tired of writing so I checked my e-mai. AGoogle search for voluntaryism came up with the URL of this article.I’ve just read it and find it to be excellent. I’ve sent the URL to four friends but will send it to others.

Slim Richey
Another non-voting, anti-political activist.

Comment by Patrick Shields

October 15, 2008 @ 2:12 am

Nice article. Very good points. I’m sending this to my friends as well!

Comment by bile

October 15, 2008 @ 7:04 am

A vote lost is as bad as a vote gained by the competitor

I wouldn’t say that. Say you have 99 voters and 55 vote for X and 44 for Y. X wins with 55/99 or 55.6% vs 55/100 or 55%. The no-vote gives X a slightly larger lead and perhaps a bigger ‘mandate’ in the minds of the bureaucrats and maybe the people. At large values this difference is all but completely insignificant. At that point the risk of courting a new voter is far higher than dealing with the pre-existing ones. In the least you get to allocate more resources per voter.

I suppose it depends on the voter population though. For instance, if it’s the case a significant number of people vote along party lines and you know there aren’t enough voters to win signing up more voters would be more people to sway. That’s of course assuming the previous non-voters were generally indifferent to their ruler and swayable.

Really… none of this shit is quantifiable. Too may variables to generalize.

Anyway… would you mind your fliers being uploaded to http://libertyactivism.info ?

Comment by Ganja Blue

October 15, 2008 @ 8:31 am

Thank you for saying this. I still haven’t decided on whether or not to vote. I’ve thought about writing in “Nobody” so my choice is clear. My other consideration is to write in a more suitable candidate, such as Ron Paul. But, if I have the opportunity to write in anyone, I think I should write in Mary Ruwart or some other principled person.

The incrementalist in me tells me that of the ballot contenders, Bob Barr is the least evil, he’s better than the other statists running. To see good numbers for Barr on election day might be a signal that voters want more Liberty. However, I don’t want to give anyone the impression that I support Barr at the helm of the Libertarian Party.

Comment by Ian

October 15, 2008 @ 9:01 am

Thanks for cross posting this, Dale. :)

Comment by hhhh

October 22, 2008 @ 11:09 pm

its ok to not vote if the choice is between two people who will uphold freedoms of speech, but if one is much more likely to oppress and perhaps jail you for your beliefs then you should obviously vote.

Comment by Mitch

October 23, 2008 @ 1:01 am

Excellent post!

Comment by Dale

October 30, 2008 @ 11:34 am

I’m finally taking time out to work on the fliers today. Thank you to everyone who’s taken time to reply and I’m sorry I didn’t get on top of this sooner. I’m going to be seeing a doctor soon about ADD medication. :) As for re-posting the fliers at other sites, absolutely! I want them as accessible as possible. Scatter them to the four winds!

Comment by den

November 3, 2008 @ 10:40 am

i understand what you are saying but i think it only works if we have a broader understanding of the no voting idea. everyone is allowed to choose because of democracy. there are good things and bad things to this. because a big part of this everyone is ‘dumb’ in that they are easily influenced by irrelevant information such as the fact that some won’t vote for obama because he is black. or they might hear a piece of false information and be swayed. there is no way to filter out these errors so the whole system no matter what is flawed. as long as we have everyone apart of the system corruption and lies and scandals are sure to follow. if we take voting out of it we also take out a part of democracy. also about the complaining thing. in the last election only 42% of people aged 18-24 actually voted. your group represents 58% of voted that could have gone elsewhere. now i’m pretty sure the approval rating got down to somewhere around 23%. how many of those people complaining represented your non voting group? the group represents the effect or uneffect. it’s not that you can’t complain. it’s that your group can’t complain.

Comment by JJ

November 4, 2008 @ 11:55 am

Actually, I read somewhere that signs of NOT voting could be seen as a sign that the system is working — those who don’t vote are content with whoever gets elected. It sounds like a bunch of BS to me, but I’m sure politicians would prefer to see it the other way. After all, it IS possible to deceive even oneself.

Even being vocal about it won’t help unless you could somehow persuade a majority of the rest of the population to not vote. I have a feeling that is too difficult a feat in practice, though. For every person you get to NOT vote and be vocal about it, you’re giving the rest that DO vote all that much more extra incentive to vote since their votes will be worth all that much more.

The two approaches I personally believe in are: 1) look at our society as a whole since the election. Did it get better or worse? If worse, and you vote against everyone currently in office. 2) Look up the candidates’ voting history (assuming they’re non-first-timers) and choose the person who voted the most in line with how you would have voted.

I agree, BOTH approaches address only symptoms rather than the problem, but I seriously doubt ANY manner of passive means will get us a REAL democracy.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the answer to the math equation shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the equation.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam equation

Subscribe without commenting