The basic reason is that I see no reason to engage in a morally dubious practice when it doesn’t even yield any pragmatic benefits. For example, if I take the wheel of a runaway bus, and I can swerve to kill 3 people instead of the 30 in the path of the bus, then maybe I go ahead and do it. Sure, I feel bad about killing 3 people who otherwise would have lived, but I understandably could “pick the lesser of two evils.”
Yet that’s not what happens if you vote for someone you think will violate property rights and order the deaths of innocent foreigners. Here, your vote is not reducing the number of people killed (unlike in the bus story). Whether or not you vote for the “lesser evil,” the same person will become president and will go about doing a whole bunch of evil. So there is no practical reason for you to join in, and thus you might as well save yourself the inconvenience of waiting in line at the polling booth.
I deal with the obvious retorts here.
{ 70 comments }
← Previous Comments
Hi everyone,
Thanks for all of the good back-and-forth. I just wanted to pop in and explain two things.
First, of course I am not advocating a position of “doing nothing.” I spent more time writing my blog post on not voting, than it would have taken me to vote (possibly).
What I am trying to get people to see is that you don’t need to buy into this ridiculous system that the government foists on us. Don’t you find it the least bit suspicious that we are told from all quarters that we need to go vote, that our brave soldiers are right now defending our right to pull a lever for two candidates who were backed by Wall Street and the media, blah blah blah? The government wants you to believe that because you vote for one of two candidates it chooses every four years, that you are “in charge.”
Second, I realize now that I should have mentioned the issue of third parties. Yes, yes, I am definitely rooting for the third party candidates. I would be ecstatic if Barr got 15% of the popular vote; that would be a wonderful sign.
But again, the same logic applies. Whether or not I vote for Barr (or write in Ron Paul or whatever), that is not going to make a whit of difference. If Barr has 15.000232% without my vote, he will have 15.000233% with it, and no news outlet is reporting to that many decimal places. So again, my vote means absolutely nothing.
And to repeat, you can’t say, “But why are you sitting back and hoping other people do something you yourself are too lazy to do?!”
I don’t want people to vote for Barr, I’m just saying it would be great if people voted for him instead of McBama. What would really make my day is if the news media reported that only 10% of the eligible voters turned out. Then the government wouldn’t have its “mandate,” and it would have less ability to order people around.
So that is really my long-run desire, that more and more people reject politics as an acceptable means for accomplishing objectives. If voter turnout dwindled to 5%, the politicians would still go through the motions etc., but the government would be a lot more careful in how far it stepped, because it would know that most people had woken up to the con.
Whatever you think the best strategy is for gaining liberty, a necessary ingredient is an educated population. So that’s why I focus my efforts on writing articles, rather than pulling a lever in a symbolic ritual setup by the government to fool people into thinking they are free.
I don’t hold it against you if you go vote for a 3rd party candidate; I used to do that myself. But even then, my purpose was so that if someone asked me, “Who’d you vote for?” I could start talking about libertarians.
But a few years ago, I realized that it was much more fundamental to say, “I don’t vote, and if you’re interested, I’ll tell you why.”
There is a long standing philosophy (I think of Lysander Spooner among others) against voting and I appreciate the ethical dilemma, and the opinions of both sides.
Nevertheless, there is a larger group out there that believes in voting. And you are witnessing one of the largest election turnouts in modern times.
The huge Chicago party will start within a couple of hours and there will be joyous bedlam by the “agents of change.” Lots of wine and song for tonight. Some statists throughout the world will hail this historic moment because somehow skin color means something to them. And the last eight years of “economic deregulation” and warmongering will be referenced as shameful.
I am glad the Republicans are getting trounced. They deserve it. They are bereft of free market credibility, and are hypocrites, championing small government yet building a bigger one. I seek a sliver lining in tonight. The only one I can find is perhaps a rejection of the ill-begotten war. This is all I have to grab onto: a denunciation of our worldwide and violent meddling. But I am not consoled for long. Because sadly, “McCain loses because of Iraq” is NOT what the electorate is saying. Sure, maybe Iraq has them pissed off, but that is not what is driving the election of Obama. The electorate is saying that government is NOT doing ENOUGH. They want government to do more — to fix healthcare, provide jobs, reduce oil prices, give it “affordable” housing, and “free” education. That is what the electorate wants. And the electorate does NOT mean via a market solution.
By the way, when Clinton was about to be elected, the Right warned of the “end of days,” of socialism, of less freedom, blah, blah, blah. Sure, he characterized himself as a “New” Democrat, but this didn’t stop the Republicans from demonizing him. A decade later? Most folks think Clinton was okay, reduced the deficit, had a strong economy. Thus, Obama will fumble along, he’ll feign cross-the-aisle compromises, with a complicit media, and not much will change. More and more government spending will be the order of the day. As it always was. The economy is not going to implode, in spite of the thoughtfull and well-grounded comments I’ve seen. Those warnings remind me of the leftists who said Reagan would bring us a nuclear war. Yes, the economy will become further regulated, but those who want to prosper will still find ways to innovate and win, either through playing the public sector game, or playing the corporatism game. The economic cycle will repeat, and things may even “improve” as far as the “average” American is concerned (Do I have a job and can I heat my house?). And the Left will sell the “we ended the deregulation nightmare.”
So I’m optimistic??? Well, yeah, because it’s not going to be the end of the world and we will find ways to be happy and thrive. I will find a way to better myself, no matter what.
Politically, things will just be more of the same — more socialized democracy, more marginalizing of my politics. But so what. My ideas have been considered kooky for decades. My biggest challenge will be to fend off the arguments/accusations that Bush was a laissez-faire kind of guy.
My Republican friend said, “I don’t mind. We needed Carter in order to get Reagan.” But under Reagan, government got bigger too. The voting dilemma is really not clear.
Regards,
F.
There’s the saying that “If you don’t vote, you lose the right to complain.” I disagree with that.
There are plenty of ways to affect the vote other than voting, and a main one is persuasion. One can participate in political discussion, keep up with the candidates and issues, and simply decide that nothing is there.
An intelligent non-vote can be the withholding of a mandate.
A footnote:
The residents of Massachusetts… check that —
The residents of Massachusetts, WHO DECIDED TO GO TO THE POLLS AND VOTE TONIGHT, were faced with a Ballot Question:
Should the State of Massachusetts
- Keep the current state income tax?
or…
- Cut and then Eliminate the state income tax?
Those residents who decided to vote spoke loud and clear:
Keep the Income Tax.
And by a 70 to 30 margin.
So the government apologists have this to say:
“As a resident of Massachusetts, shut your mouth and keep forking over 5.3% of your income. And this also goes for you residents who didn’t vote.”
Regards,
F.
Ron
Sorry to go heavy on you. Low blood sugar, running backups and doing a couple other things at the same time
Cheers!
-r
There are some very well spoken and thoughtful comments on this blog.
As a relative newcomer to this site, let me commend you fellows for discussing a contentious and important subject without degenerating into a firestorm of unproductive emotional finger pointing.
THIS is why I continue to visit these blogs, and continue to benefit greatly from them. You all are actively helping to expand my economic and political views, and setting the stage for, hopefully, a grassroots return to sensibilities with respect to out of control government. This type of impact in the lone outlook of a single individual is eminently more important than whether I cast my single vote today or not.
OK, many of the facts are on this blog already, but never all in one post nor logically explained. FTR: I have great respect for those who post here and for those who seek to understand the wisdom of the Austrian school. OK, now that the bonafides are satisfied:
1) The US has a 2 party system… get used to it. To say it is rigged is quite beside the point. And forget arguing about the Whigs and the Tories; as many even on this post have already lamented, 3rd parties in this day get no traction. It is true that the other two parties have rigged the fight, but again I say… we actually have to deal with the conditions on the ground, not our high-minded concept of what is right.
2) Perfection is not humanly possible so why spend so much energy pretending that only perfection is useful. I’d bet that only a precious few who visit this site find perfection even in their own modest worlds.
3) Political power is obtainable, but not by those who are too good to join the fray. Ron Paul is half right; he comes much closer than the traditional libertarian. He made the usual crucial mistake of libertairians by keeping his feet in both camps thereby minimizing and marginalizing his efforts. Much was made of his lack of committment to the Republican party; think what you might, but it only makes sense that the party would deny him a higher stage. Paul has other problems as a candidate but even those coud be overcome with perserverance and committment.
4) One vote isn’t enough; it takes work. Consider Ronald Reagan: He was a man (like Obama I might add) who thought long and hard about what it would take to become the President of the US. He started small, began by reading his hand-written position papers on his weekly radio program. He caught the attention of some Republicans and they ‘sponsored’ him for Governor of California. He learned to speak well in the rubber chicken circuit; he worked long and hard and managed to continually stay ahead in the political game by leading, not by following. He had setbacks, of course, but he perservered and after his third attempt won the Republican nomination.
5) I’d venture that many who contribute to Mises.org have the wherewithal to engage in the political process… or is only Ron Paul whocapable? Imagine a world where the top 200 Austrian Economists actually became involved in the ‘real’ political process, not the Libertarian party. Not marginalized but part of the process, part of the POWER STRUCTURE which forms the policies of this country…. would the world be a better place? Of course it would. Now image that 20,000 of the top libertarians got together and formed a third party… hypothetically we’ll call it the Libertarian Party. Would the 200 or the 20,000 have the greater impact? I think you all know the answer.
The scene on the street tonight in my city was pretty sickening: kids driving up and down, cheering and waving their savior’s signs. In my house I heard cheering in the distance well into the night. I’ve never seen such enthusiasm for a candidate after a presidential election, and it’s so depressing. This calls for drastic measures, so I say fuck the scam that’s voting, the notion that the state does anything useful, or that it’s worthy of participation by anyone who knows anything about what’s decent .
Where voting is paper-based with an actual wirting instrument, there is a third option that has its uses:, and I myself used it in the dying days of Apartheid in South Africa. This was when th eruling party called a referendum ( among whites only) on some mild ‘reforms’. The ‘no’ camp of diehard racists considered these reforms were going too far, and the ‘yes’ camp of soft but comfortable liberals loudly supported what amounted to tinkering on the edges of apartheid machine.
Those who believed the proposed reforms didnt go FAR ENOUGH, had no way of opposing the proposal without being lumped with the white fascists. SO this grouping elected to go to the polls, signifying a greater interest than absentee apathy, submitted spoiled papers, sending the message that NEITHER option was palatable.
INdividually, a spoilt paper is indistinguishable from stupidity, but with a proper campaign, and sufficient support, a significant number of spoilt papers in a poll sends a powerful message: Here’s a bunch of people who are not happy with what any of these parties are selling, and they are still interested enough to jump through the polling hoops to make that point.
No worries, redshirt.
We’re all here to learn and figure stuff out, and considering different viewpoints is an important part of the process. We may disagree with each other, but it’s all in the interest of getting to the truth.
~ Ron
It’s a pitty to read. I doubt the next President will be a president all 4 years. I think we’ll see how he takes responsibility for all mistakes of previous governments. Somebody should.
My unique brand of obnoxious and twisted thinking regarding voting appears on the related thread at Bob Murphy’s blog: http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2008/11/why-i-dont-vote.html.
Hint: voting exhibits signs of ritualistic behavior (which of course politicians love to tap into and manipulate).
Where I can take prednison online ? There? – [u=http://www.pillsstock.com]buy thyroid online[/u] . Please give me a link if u know it.
Where I can take prednison online ? There? – [u=http://www.pillsstock.com]buy thyroid online[/u] . Please give me a link if u know it.
Where I can take prednison online ? There? – [u=http://www.pillprovide.info/]aldactone spironolactone spirotone [/u] . Please give me a link if u know it. There [url=http://www.pillprovide.info/]what is aldactone[/url] produced by Boehringer Ingelheim.
Where I can take prednison online ? There? – [u=http://www.dosestock.info/]employment drug testing aldactone [/u] . Please give me a link if u know it. There [url=http://www.dosestock.info/]medication aldactone[/url] produced by Boehringer Ingelheim.
Where I can take prednison online ? There? – [u=http://www.pillsstockonline.info/]double dose aldactone by accident [/u] . Please give me a link if u know it. There [url=http://www.pillsstockonline.info/]does aldactone cause depression[/url] produced by Boehringer Ingelheim.
Where you find this template for blog? Please send me to email link to this site with free templates . )
Frankly, the system is broken. And I don’t see the point in voting for a system that is beyond repair.
I don’t vote anymore. Usually I just voted in predsidential elections and I think that every president I voted for did actually end up winning. However, I realized that if I didn’t vote that president still would have won. If he hadn’t of won he probably would have lost by more than 100 votes or more so one vote would not have made a difference anyway. Even in the Bush/Gore election Florida was the close one. So even if I lived in Florida which I don’t, and then had voted for Gore he still would not have won because some 570 votes where needed for Gore to take Florida. Don’t get me wrong, I think it is great that people vote, and voting probably gives that person some satisfaction in taking part in that process and that is great. However, this whole notion that my one vote could make or break any election is really just fooling myself.
So yes, I don’t vote because I really just don’t want to stand in that line only to see that out come go the one way even if I hadn’t of voted. Of course my one vote counts, but it ain’t going to change the out come.
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.