Earwicker wrote:What are you doing about the fact that your votes have been stolen?

Not that it's your business, but for the sake of the dialogue: I spent a large chunk of 2004 working for an organization that investigates voter fraud, though they do a bunch of other stuff too and are constrained by their budget, and though voter fraud in national elections does not seem to be a problem in my state. At this point I am doing other stuff, and if you have a problem with that, you're welcome to try to live on the pay I got for doing that work. Also, since you seem to be interested in questions of personal responsibility, feel free to describe all that you are doing about fucked-up shit where you live.

Earwicker wrote:part of the reason for this is because they feel they can make their voice heard through the voting system next time.

If the wussy Democratic Party could call off the quest for some vaporous Moderate Grail and kick some ass, that would help. Meanwhile you're saying that it's, what, DELUSIONAL to even BOTHER to vote AT ALL in the current situation? Fuck that.

ctrl-s wrote:If the wussy Democratic Party could call off the quest for some vaporous Moderate Grail and kick some ass, that would help.

Here's my ultra-cynical prediction ( can you make any other kind in 2006? ):

We will continue to see repeats of Dean-mania in future national elections. Some white knight firebrand lefty will surge to the front of the pack, collect a pile of grass roots money, get millions of Democrats to believe in the system again, and then either collapse in collaboration with the status quo ( Trojan horse ) or be swarmed upon by the coordinated opinion factory of the media ( still not sure which category Howard Dean fell into).

Then, we will have the choice of either the 'Democrat' who is tolerable to the elites or the Republican who wins when the propaganda and dirty trick machines really kick ass. The false ( or fake ) hope offered by the new Dean is useful for preserving the illusion of two party politics and for further demoralizing more true believers.

You should always vote, BTW. There is always a correct choice, even if it is between two sides of the same coin. Just because it frequently seems pointless doesn't mean that it still isn't inches away from being meaningful.

We ought to ditch the electoral college, for a start. Popular vote, all fifty states counted as one. Take that, red state hillbillies. And make the vote honest and auditable.

steve wrote:How does being an activist -- changing the way people will vote -- inspire this respect when the activist, in your estimation, is telling people to concern themselves with a "trivial" matter that has no effect?

This is the critical point here. There is a wealth of power in how people vote. Don't kid yourself that there's not. Sure, if you're a single individual, you can say it's a matter of simple math. But if you're part of an organization that can influence how others vote, you gain power.

So go join an organization. Go figure out how to influence how people vote. (Hint - it means talking to them about what's in their self interest, framing that in an honest way about why they should vote for the candidate you like and then following up with them on Election Day to make sure they do/did it.) Of course, this has more influence at the local level than the national level (unless you're organization is powerful at the national level). But it's how people win elections and get government to do some of what they want.

My lesson learned from the 2004 election - when the NYTime caught up with Rove in an Arizona airport on election night, he had a piece of paper where he was carrying Bush's margin of victory in each state that was accurate to the single digit. If you didn't vote for Kerry - you were on that piece of paper. File this fact under "Sucks, But True".

Karl Rove says - "Don't like my candidates? Then don't vote."

Please, friends. Let's not mix up the world as it is with the way we'd like it to be.

= Justin

steve wrote:How does being an activist -- changing the way people will vote -- inspire this respect when the activist, in your estimation, is telling people to concern themselves with a "trivial" matter that has no effect?

"an activist - changing the way people will vote".... quite a limited definition of activism.

evidently you are so enamored with the voting system that you think activists exist solely for the purpose of influencing voters. the fact is that only a small portion of activism concerns voting. the rest of activism concerns lobbying, rallies, working at soup kitchens, soliciting donations to assist third world countries, etc. concerning the activists who concentrate on mobilizing voters, i would certainly say that they dont have much effect.


anyhow i seem to be wasting my time. you will go vote in the next election, and the drive to and from the voting booths will induce enough volatility in the world (driving = placing many people at risk by driving heavy machinery at a fast rate, plus pollution) to completely negate whatever balance you can possibly induce with your vote. but you think youre saving the world so rah rah.

ctrl-s wrote:

Earwicker wrote:What are you doing about the fact that your votes have been stolen?

I’ve just had a look over and I don't think I actually wrote that. I tried to word it in a less confrontational way which indicated that I was genuinely interested in what you did. I wasn’t making an automatic presumption that you (personally) didn’t do anything but I was saying that you (Americans as a whole group) didn’t do enough.

The uppity ‘not that it’s any of your business’ tone was uncalled for and I would say incorrect. If we are indulging in a debate about the merits of fair elections then someone praising them whilst being in a country that doesn’t have them can be legitimately asked what they are doing to try and bring them about. It is my business simply because we are communicating and it is good to know where the person you are communicating with is coming from.
As it stands you do (or have done) something about it. Good for you. Does it ever piss you off that the mass of Americans don’t do anything about it?

It could also be argued that it is my business because our noble leader follows yours like a lap dog (as most have since the Second World War) and so the person who steals your election has a direct effect on the people we elect. Therefore the mass of Americans not rising up and getting rid of the fucker affects me.
I wouldn’t bother arguing that. I’m just saying that could be argued.

Likewise America is, by a country mile, the world’s largest producer of greenhouse gases (for the time being at least) so if a thief steals the presidency and instead of doing nothing about that instead lets his buddies do whatever the fuck they want to the air we breathe exacerbating the earth’s climate shifting out of balance then Americans not doing anything about their stolen government is, in part, my business.
It is everyone in the world’s business.


With regards my interest in personal responsibility I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned it beyond this thread. With regards where I live: we live in a country where our ruler was elected so not so much need to complain about that. The fact that in my idealised view of the world no man should rule over another (or certainly not rule over me) is going to make absolutely no difference to anything socially. It is a view also at odds with my observations of humans generally. Many it seems are too fucking stupid to get along without rulers. So they have them. I am not sure it matters much how they got them.

I was not born with a silver spoon in my mouth or get to Oxbridge by some other means so have little real political influence, am unlikely to get it and am not even sure I would want it. I am happy, for the time being, sorting out who and what I am, developing who I am and trying to be nice and good to those immediately around me. Anyone who intends to behave politically should do this first and foremost. If they don’t (and let’s face it, the vast, vast majority don’t) then their political action will come to no good. And let’s also face it political action very, very rarely comes to any good.

So - I occasionally write to my MP about things concerning me (He’s never replied. He’s a cunt. His political action led to many abused children being returned to their abusive families. He did this because he could make political advantage of it. No one talks about it but Cleveland is being renamed partly because of it. He will be in his post pretty much indefinitely cause he’s Labour and people round here vote labour cause their Dad did (do these people deserve democracy?))
I recycle (I wash out the tins and bottles and am left wondering if this produces more waste of energy than the recycling of the stuff. We often drive to the recycling machine.)
I pay money every month to charity. (I am against charity in principle but think let’s face it the fuckers we are so lucky to have voted in aren’t going to help anyone they don’t have to so…
This charitable direct debit payment has on numerous occasions put me over my overdraft limit and the bank has charged me more then I gave to the charity. This is due to the fact that I forget I am doing it.
I am not sure if that is commendable or condemnable.)
For a living I try and pass on skills I have learnt creatively to less fortunate people in our community. (It is largely a waste of time. The poor sons and daughters of bitches are already stuck in the same hopeless cycles that their parents are still spinning in and as much as I try and tell myself I'm doing some good, deep down, I know I'm not.)
I guess best of all I love.
And I know how to.

It’s also rather odd that I began my involvement on this thread agreeing with someone pro voting.
I also intend voting in the next election.
But if there isn’t anyone worth voting for what then?

Look again. That quote is verbatim from an earlier post of yours. My "uppity" (your word) tone was in response to it.

It could also be argued that your leaders being lapdogs to ours is your collective problem, far more so than our leaders and our elections are.

I think I'm done with talking to you on this thread.

edit: Not meaning to be nasty about that last bit, at all, either. I know the limitations of internet communication when it comes to tone, or rather I should by now.

BClark wrote:you will go vote in the next election, and the drive to and from the voting booths will induce enough volatility in the world (driving = placing many people at risk by driving heavy machinery at a fast rate, plus pollution) to completely negate whatever balance you can possibly induce with your vote. but you think youre saving the world so rah rah.

Why do you see voting and other forms of political activism as mutually exclusive? Does it not follow that if I can be a good person to my fellow men, argue and behave honorably instead of voting, I can do those things as well as voting?

What is the negative consequence of voting, if that vote has a chance at being counted toward a greater good? I'm not making a defense of voting, I'm asking you to explain why it is bad to vote. Is it the driving thing?

steve wrote:why it is bad to vote

Because society has this ingrained notion of an exclusive, two-party voting system of either "Republican" or "Democrat". It is a limited set of parameters that really narrow the alternatives. People become disillusioned by the voting process like myself as a result. We don't "elect" presidents, we "hire" them for a price. This is a constant element that isn't going to change anytime soon and I don't care to compromise with one side because I can agree on a few issues. It isn't a very stable foundation to work on.

I don't understand "not voting", although if there was a "none of the above" option that would be a lot better.

I love voting, I've voted in every single election, local and national I've been able to since I was eighteen.

Voting is power, I like power.

To those on the "don't bother to vote" side of this debate:

Are you advocating not voting because you believe that participation in the electoral system implies an endorsement of the system? Maybe a vote isn't heard very loudly, but isn't abstention like the unheard tree falling in the forest? Do you folks see it as an 'activist' stance?