David Foster Wallace said better than I: "If you are bored and disgusted by politics and don't bother to vote, you are in effect voting for the entrenched Establishments of the two major parties, who please rest assured are not dumb, and who are keenly aware that it is in their interests to keep you disgusted and bored and cynical and to give you every possible psychological reason to stay at home doing one-hitters and watching MTV on primary day. By all means stay home if you want, but don't bullshit yourself that you're not voting. In reality, there is no such thing as not voting: you either vote by voting, or you vote by staying home and tacitly doubling the value of some Diehard's vote."
Eloquent and wrong. Voting for anything other than one of the two entrenched parties is usually a waste of time and gasoline. There is no cabal of evil masterminds responsible for cynicism and apathy - it's an emergent property of the rules of the game.
If you can join forces with like-minded citizens in support an idea that you believe in, as part of a movement that could change national policies for the better, then please do so. If you believe doing so has a reasonable chance of making the world a better place, then maybe you even have a moral obligation to do so. But just voting out of some misplaced sense of civic duty is stupid.
> join forces with like-minded citizens in support an idea that you believe in
That looks like the definition of a political party to me. Saying that creating more parties is a solution to the current 2-party situation (which, I agree, is bad) doesn't seem right to me. I don't really have a solution, though.
Voting for someone outside of those 2 parties is only a waste of time because so many people are doing such a good job of convincing everyone that it is. If the >50% of the population that never votes all went out and voted third party, even if they were different third parties, then maybe some of them would qualify for government $, and then maybe one of them could get even more supporters in the next election with that money.
By not voting you're taking away your .000001% influence on the outcome. By not voting and telling everyone it doesn't make sense to vote, you're taking away the influence of everyone you convince not to vote, and making it that much harder for anyone trying to create the kind of movements you suggest.
One thing I don't like about the moral «obligation» to vote is that to many people, casting a ballot is all the political action they can consider. Politics seems reduced to elect one of the two big parties. It seems that the alternative is, either to vote or to not make any political action.
The truth is that many people are politically active independently of wether they vote or not.
One thing I don't like about the moral «obligation» to vote is that to many people, casting a ballot is all the political action they can consider. Politics seems reduced to elect one of the two big parties. It seems that the alternative is, either to vote or to not make any political action.
While others believe in voting, I believe in entrepreneurship for the sake of eroding politics.
I have deep philosophical problems with governments and politics in general. That's not likely to change.
However, I am not a cynical person. I believe I could change and undermine the influences of governments and introduce voluntary and non-coercive form of organizations.
As much as I disdain their movement, the Tea Partiers are proving you wrong. It's no coincidence that 75% of this group are 45 years or older. As we all know, the elder demographic votes in large and reliable numbers. This is how they're realizing such success tonight. By voting -- not by rallying or organizing.
What I'm hearing is that you do not vote because you resent some perceived obligation do so. Seriously?
The opportunity to cast one's vote is a distinct privilege.
Huh? The Tea Party is a good example of how to unify people behind ideas - exactly what I was talking about. And I never said I didn't vote. What I find stupid is the idea that you have some kind of obligation to vote just to voice your opinion. In particular, voting for 3rd party candidates that are not well known enough to possibly win is stupid. There may be exceptions if a respectable showing is part of a strategy.
