Voting

[AndreaGail]

http://desmond.imageshack.us/Himg21/scaled.php?server=21&filename=70792032.jpg&res=landing

[Dogman]

Had a call from, a republican call center last night, the bright chipper voice started in about Romney. I interrupted her and said I will save her some time. She asked ? I said I do not care for republicans or democrats but I wold have voted for Ron Paul if he was the nominee. I told her since he was not on the ticket, I would write my dog name on the ballot and vote for her!

Dead silence on the phone, then a thank you and she hung up!

[Hatha Sunahara]

I don't see any point in voting any more. The process of counting the votes is compromised and corrupt. And then the only candidates on the ballot (Repugnicants and Demogogs) are also compromised and corrupt because they are beholden to the banksters. So why should I legitimize this charade by participating in it? I don't care if only really stupid people vote. They're not going to change anything either.


Hatha

[midnight rambler]

So why should I legitimize this charade by participating in it?

By 'voting' one sanctions their nonsense (not to mention the issue with swearing to be a 'US citizen' under the pains and penalties of perjury when signing the 'voter registration').

[hoarder]

Since we're posting voting cartoons:

[iOWNme]

When you were a child you remember seeing the bully's on the school yard. They would steal a smaller kids candy, and hold it above his head to make him BEG for his candy back. The two bully's would toss the candy back and forth, making the child run back and forth to chase his own property. The goal here is to make the child feel weak, to teach the child that his property can be taken away at anytime, and to finally mold the child into a begging slave.

When you vote the same exact scenario is played out....

Your money and property are STOLEN from you through Government FORCE and THEFT. You are left to run back and forth between the two political Bully's (Demo v Repub) and BEG for a small portion of your private property back. You get so dizzy from running around, you end up picking one of the bully's to side with: The Bully that has promised to give you back more of your stolen property. You then vote accordingly, all the while with the feeling that you have somehow accomplished something. PATHETIC.

Stop legitimizing the immoral acts of THIEVES. You validate their actions and only serve to motivate and promote more of this insane system. Keep your pride intact, and do not BEG your attacker to be nice to you in his dungeon. Tell your attacker to his face you know that he is a thief, and that he will have to kill you to get your property.

Not to mention, in this Corporate fictional system you have given the thieves political allegiance by 'Registering' to vote. The mere act of 'Registering' is consent to be stolen from. If you are a registered voter, stop complaining about the current state of affairs, and get out there and vote! PUKE.

[palani]

vote (n.)
mid-15c., from L. votum "a vow, wish, promise, dedication," noun use of neuter of votus, pp. of vovere "to promise, dedicate" (see vow). The verb in the modern sense is attested from 1550s; earlier it meant "to vow" to do something (1530s). Related: Voted; voting.

vow (n.)
c.1300, from Anglo-Fr. and O.Fr. vou, from L. votum "a vow, wish, promise, dedication," noun use of neut. of votus, pp. of vovere "to promise solemnly, pledge, dedicate, vow," from PIE root *ewegwh- "to speak solemnly, vow" (cf. Skt. vaghat- "one who offers a sacrifice;" Gk. eukhe "vow, wish," eukhomai "I pray").

[Hatha Sunahara]

Here is a thoughtful piece that weighs the merits of not voting:

http://www.strike-the-root.com/vote.html


Non-voting
In his On The Duty of Civil Disobedience (1849), Henry David Thoreau asked:

How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it . . . . What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.

Readers of Strike The Root recognize that there are two principal demands that their governments make upon them: pay your taxes and vote. (Of course, there are many other "demands," such as military service, send your children to school, have a drivers license, etc., but many of these are ancillary to the primary means of government survival, which is the collection of taxes.)

Now, of these two principal demands, taxation carries criminal sanctions: Pay your money or we imprison your body and/or confiscate your property. However, as yet in most nations of the world, failure to vote in government elections carries no penalty.

Governments, like all other hierarchical institutions, depend upon the cooperation and, at least, the tacit consent of those over whom they exercise power. In other words, government soldiers and police can force people to do things they don't want to do, but in the long run--in the face of adamant opposition--such coercion is either too expensive or too futile to accomplish its goals of subjugating entire populations. It is far simpler to motivate people to do what you want them to do, rather than forcing them to do it by pointing guns at them all the time. As Boris Yeltsin supposedly said, "You can build a throne with bayonets, but you can't sit on it long."

Educating generations of parents and children in government schools and teaching them to be patriotic and support their government in political elections is one of the fundamental ways governments garner public support. Citizens are taught that it is both their right and duty to vote. But all this is done with an ulterior motive in mind. As Theodore Lowi, in his book INCOMPLETE CONQUEST: GOVERNING AMERICA pointed out:
Participation is an instrument of [government] conquest because it encourages people to give their consent to being governed . . . . Deeply embedded in people's sense of fair play is the principle that those who play the game must accept the outcome. Those who participate in politics are similarly committed, even if they are consistently on the losing side. Why do politicians plead with everyone to get out and vote? Because voting is the simplest and easiest form of participation [of supporting the state] by masses of people. Even though it is minimal participation, it is sufficient to commit all voters to being governed, regardless of who wins.

Not voting in government elections is one way of refusing to participate; of refusing to consent to government rule over your life. Non-voting may be seen as an act of personal secession, of exposing the myth behind "government by consent." There are many reasons, both moral and practical, for choosing "not to vote," and they have been discussed in my anthology, DISSENTING ELECTORATE (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/078640874X?ie=UTF8&tag=striketheroot-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=078640874X). To briefly summarize:

Truth does not depend upon a majority vote. Two plus two equals four regardless of how many people vote that it equals five.

Individuals have rights which do not depend on the outcome of elections. Majorities of voters cannot vote away the rights of a single individual or groups of individuals.

Voting is implicitly a coercive act because it lends support to a compulsory government.

Voting reinforces the legitimacy of the state because the participation of the voters makes it appear that they approve of their government.

There are ways of opposing the state, other than by voting "against" the incumbents. (And remember, even if the opposition politicians are the lesser of two evils, they are still evil.) Such non-political methods as civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, home schooling, bettering one's self, and improving one's own understanding of voluntaryism all go far in robbing the government of its much sought after legitimacy.

As Thoreau pointed out, "All voting is a sort of gaming, like chequers or backgammon . . . . Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it." So whatever you do, don't play the government's game. Don't vote. Do something for the right.

~ Carl Watner (December 2009)

Hatha