Let us not vote and complain about the outcome--we have the right!

[bilby]

Regardless, you have the right to move elsewhere.

No you don't. Every square inch of this world has been claimed by sovereign nations and all have some restrictions.

Who said anything about this world?

Sure, it is expensive to go elsewhere, but freedom of movement does not entail the right to a free airline ticket (or a free spaceship).

 

[dismal]

People are brainwashed into thinking voting is important. In favor of it you get nothing but emotional arguments that border on delusion.

The math doesn't lie. Your individual act of voting is essentially meaningless.

Absolutely. And the individual contribution of any one cell in your body is effectively nil too. If (or rather, when) one dies, it has zero effect on you. So they should all just die. It wouldn't matter at all. Right?

Logic fail.

If I don't vote the system doesn't die.

You're doing a nice job illustrating what I said about the sorts of arguments people make in favor of voting though.

 

[bilby]

People are brainwashed into thinking voting is important. In favor of it you get nothing but emotional arguments that border on delusion.

The math doesn't lie. Your individual act of voting is essentially meaningless.

Absolutely. And the individual contribution of any one cell in your body is effectively nil too. If (or rather, when) one dies, it has zero effect on you. So they should all just die. It wouldn't matter at all. Right?

Logic fail.

If I don't vote the system doesn't die.

You're doing a nice job illustrating what I said about the sorts of arguments people make in favor of voting though.

Comprehension fail.

If you don't vote, nothing happens. If nobody votes, the system does indeed die. (Of course there is plenty of room to debate whether that is a good or a bad thing, which rather depends in what replaces the dead system).

 

[dismal]

If you don't vote, nothing happens.

Right, that's exactly my point.

If nobody votes, the system does indeed die.

My act of voting or not voting does not create this outcome. By insinuating it does you are making an irrational or emotional argument.

Unless you do think my not voting causes everyone else not to vote in which case you are venturing into the delusional.

 

[prideandfall]

Comprehension fail.

If you don't vote, nothing happens. If nobody votes, the system does indeed die. (Of course there is plenty of room to debate whether that is a good or a bad thing, which rather depends in what replaces the dead system).

and you present both a logic and a comprehension fail - impressive!
IF nobody voted, the system would die - but that doesn't happen, so it doesn't matter. IF the sun exploded, we'd all be dead... IF all the oxygen on the planet turned into chlorine gas, we'd all be dead. IF every tuesday was mandatory blowjob and cheese cake day, i'd be much happier... but that's never, ever, ever going to happen, so basing an argument on that happening is pointless and stupid.

as to the original question:
simply put, we're all born against our will into whatever country we live in - and while as a member of the species there can be a compelling argument about how we all have at least some level of obligation to "play nice" within society as a whole for the good of collectively maintaining human civilization, that doesn't mean we have a moral duty to take part in social or political systems that we consider inherently and insurmountably against our own interests.
i do not vote because the entire US political system is fucked from the ground up. it works insofar as the country hasn't imploded on itself, but nothing about the US political system in any way represents my morals, ideals, or interests.
yes, democrats disgust me substantially less than republicans do and i'll always prefer that a dem gets elected, but i just don't give a shit enough about the current or future state of the country to masturbate into a ballot box every few years.

elections in the US are essentially determined by zealots - whichever party either gets their base the most pissed off to bolster attendance or whichever party's base has gotten the most pissed off by the other party that year is the one that wins, period.
unless voting in the US has a massive structural revamp and becomes both convenient and compulsory (which it should do, by the way) individuals or even giant teeming masses of individuals voting or not simply doesn't matter, the system is specifically built so that it doesn't matter.

as george carlin said: those who do not vote, and thus are in no way responsible for the state of the political system, have the most (and indeed only) right to complain about things.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeMGqTwWA6U[/youtube]

 

[bilby]

Right, that's exactly my point.

If nobody votes, the system does indeed die.

My act of voting or not voting does not create this outcome. By insinuating it does you are making an irrational or emotional argument.

Unless you do think my not voting causes everyone else not to vote in which case you are venturing into the delusional.

I didn't suggest that it did; I have stated the facts (any you have agreed with them); all of the emotional inferences are on your part.

I am pointing out that the collective outcome is real. Despite there being nothing to see at the level of the individual - something that Ayn Rand and her nutty followers are constantly claiming is impossible.

I don't mind whether you vote or not. As I said earlier, if voting once every few years is the extent of a person's political engagement, then they are still not doing enough to avoid hypocrisy if they subsequently complain about the results.

I just see this very obvious example of a collective reality that is not just the sum of individual contributions as an excellent example of why Rand is wrong - which is a far more important political fact than whether Joe Bloggs voted, or for whom.

 

[bilby]

Comprehension fail.

If you don't vote, nothing happens. If nobody votes, the system does indeed die. (Of course there is plenty of room to debate whether that is a good or a bad thing, which rather depends in what replaces the dead system).

and you present both a logic and a comprehension fail - impressive!
IF nobody voted, the system would die - but that doesn't happen, so it doesn't matter. IF the sun exploded, we'd all be dead... IF all the oxygen on the planet turned into chlorine gas, we'd all be dead. IF every tuesday was mandatory blowjob and cheese cake day, i'd be much happier... but that's never, ever, ever going to happen, so basing an argument on that happening is pointless and stupid.

as to the original question:
simply put, we're all born against our will into whatever country we live in - and while as a member of the species there can be a compelling argument about how we all have at least some level of obligation to "play nice" within society as a whole for the good of collectively maintaining human civilization, that doesn't mean we have a moral duty to take part in social or political systems that we consider inherently and insurmountably against our own interests.
i do not vote because the entire US political system is fucked from the ground up. it works insofar as the country hasn't imploded on itself, but nothing about the US political system in any way represents my morals, ideals, or interests.
yes, democrats disgust me substantially less than republicans do and i'll always prefer that a dem gets elected, but i just don't give a shit enough about the current or future state of the country to masturbate into a ballot box every few years.

elections in the US are essentially determined by zealots - whichever party either gets their base the most pissed off to bolster attendance or whichever party's base has gotten the most pissed off by the other party that year is the one that wins, period.
unless voting in the US has a massive structural revamp and becomes both convenient and compulsory (which it should do, by the way) individuals or even giant teeming masses of individuals voting or not simply doesn't matter, the system is specifically built so that it doesn't matter.

as george carlin said: those who do not vote, and thus are in no way responsible for the state of the political system, have the most (and indeed only) right to complain about things.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HeMGqTwWA6U[/youtube]

That's a nice rant. Shame it doesn't oppose my actual position.

I can't even watch the video right now, do there is not even the mitigation of getting to watch George Carlin

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Of course, there is a LOT more that one might potentially do than merely voting; and people whose sole contribution to the process is to cast a ballot once every few years are not much more justified in bitching about the outcome than those who do bugger all. If you really, really care, then running for office is a good option; or if that isn't your thing, supporting the campaign of someone whose ideas you largely agree with is a good choice - even if those ideas are insufficiently popular to have much chance of getting them elected, just getting them out there is a worthwhile exercise - the major parties will occasionally try to appeal to the minor party voters by adopting parts of their platform; but they almost never amend their manifestos an the basis of a guy in a pub whining about his lot to all and sundry.

I've done all that. Party officer, elected official, signature gatherer, etc. The system really is rigged to prevent change.

 

[Nexus]

Who said anything about this world?

Sure, it is expensive to go elsewhere, but freedom of movement does not entail the right to a free airline ticket (or a free spaceship).

We are talking about this world as long as there is to be a coherent discussion about your claim that people have the right to move elsewhere. And yes if we are discussing rights it does include having the means to exercise those rights ie having them subsidized if necessary.

For instance we have a right to legal counsel in the US. Since its a right it means more than just being allowed to hire an attorney. So your original claim than people have the right to move somewhere else is false due to other jurisdictions immigration laws as well as some people not being provided the means to go elsewhere.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Regardless, you have the right to move elsewhere.

No you don't. Every square inch of this world has been claimed by sovereign nations and all have some restrictions.

Who said anything about this world?

Sure, it is expensive to go elsewhere, but freedom of movement does not entail the right to a free airline ticket (or a free spaceship).

As I read it he wasn't talking about the means but the where. Where to do that is not already claimed as the property of some gang/government. Every square inch of land is the property of some gang of thugs, so if you want to move somewhere that isn't claimed by some gang of thugs you have nowhere to go.

 

[Unbeatable]

What difference does the "right" to complain make?

In practice, it seems to me that the actual consequences of complaining has more to do with other variables (e.g. whether your audience agrees with your complaints)than with whether you voted, or contributed to a political campaign, or marched on Washington, etc. Unless you're discussing politics in a crowd of actual activists, lobbyists, or politicians, chances are most people around you are not in a position to throw stones when it comes to the question of how much action you have personally taken to prevent the thing about which you're complaining.

The idea of not having a right to complain if you haven't made some token effort to participate in the political process (never mind that your complaints have the potential to persuade others to vote differently) strikes me as a mere rhetorical ploy serving the same function as an ad hominem-- distract from the message by shifting the focus to the messenger. Who actually consistently applies their professed rules about who does and does not have the right to complain? Who consistently checks to see if complainers meet their criteria? The knowledge that you haven't voted is essentially just one more piece of rhetorical ammunition that a sufficiently dishonest person can use against you if they deem it in their interests to do so. If you have voted, or if they don't bother checking/can't check to see if you've voted, they'll just find/invent other ammunition.

 

[bilby]

Of course, there is a LOT more that one might potentially do than merely voting; and people whose sole contribution to the process is to cast a ballot once every few years are not much more justified in bitching about the outcome than those who do bugger all. If you really, really care, then running for office is a good option; or if that isn't your thing, supporting the campaign of someone whose ideas you largely agree with is a good choice - even if those ideas are insufficiently popular to have much chance of getting them elected, just getting them out there is a worthwhile exercise - the major parties will occasionally try to appeal to the minor party voters by adopting parts of their platform; but they almost never amend their manifestos an the basis of a guy in a pub whining about his lot to all and sundry.

I've done all that. Party officer, elected official, signature gatherer, etc. The system really is rigged to prevent change.

That's not a bug; it's a feature.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Of course, there is a LOT more that one might potentially do than merely voting; and people whose sole contribution to the process is to cast a ballot once every few years are not much more justified in bitching about the outcome than those who do bugger all. If you really, really care, then running for office is a good option; or if that isn't your thing, supporting the campaign of someone whose ideas you largely agree with is a good choice - even if those ideas are insufficiently popular to have much chance of getting them elected, just getting them out there is a worthwhile exercise - the major parties will occasionally try to appeal to the minor party voters by adopting parts of their platform; but they almost never amend their manifestos an the basis of a guy in a pub whining about his lot to all and sundry.

I've done all that. Party officer, elected official, signature gatherer, etc. The system really is rigged to prevent change.

That's not a bug; it's a feature.

Which means all those who say that we should vote if we are unsatisfied with the system are talking out their ass.

 

[bilby]

Regardless, you have the right to move elsewhere.

No you don't. Every square inch of this world has been claimed by sovereign nations and all have some restrictions.

Who said anything about this world?

Sure, it is expensive to go elsewhere, but freedom of movement does not entail the right to a free airline ticket (or a free spaceship).

As I read it he wasn't talking about the means but the where. Where to do that is not already claimed as the property of some gang/government. Every square inch of land is the property of some gang of thugs, so if you want to move somewhere that isn't claimed by some gang of thugs you have nowhere to go.

You seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that people have a right to opt out of society entirely; they do not have such a right, although in many places, the right to move to a different society is granted to most people.

Pick the least objectionable place to live, and live there. If you still don't like it, work to change it. If you cannot make it tolerable by working within the system, then your only remaining recourse would be suicide, or founding a completely new society - either by violent revolution, or by going where no society currently exists (for example, a ship, platform or artificial island in international waters). None of those options are likely to result in a better outcome than simply picking your least-worst country to live in (or the least-worst of those that will grant you citizenship), and then taking an active part in the political scene in that country.

No-one is, ever has been, or is ever likely to be 'free' in the absolute sense of not having to obey any rules imposed by others. Most of us work this out before the end of our teens, although Americans seem to take rather longer than the international average.

 

[dismal]

Right, that's exactly my point.

If nobody votes, the system does indeed die.

My act of voting or not voting does not create this outcome. By insinuating it does you are making an irrational or emotional argument.

Unless you do think my not voting causes everyone else not to vote in which case you are venturing into the delusional.

I didn't suggest that it did; I have stated the facts (any you have agreed with them); all of the emotional inferences are on your part.

So, if we're all agreed your point is completely irrelevant we should probably just ignore it.

I'll leave the issue of why you brought it up to you and your therapist or priest.

 

[bilby]

Of course, there is a LOT more that one might potentially do than merely voting; and people whose sole contribution to the process is to cast a ballot once every few years are not much more justified in bitching about the outcome than those who do bugger all. If you really, really care, then running for office is a good option; or if that isn't your thing, supporting the campaign of someone whose ideas you largely agree with is a good choice - even if those ideas are insufficiently popular to have much chance of getting them elected, just getting them out there is a worthwhile exercise - the major parties will occasionally try to appeal to the minor party voters by adopting parts of their platform; but they almost never amend their manifestos an the basis of a guy in a pub whining about his lot to all and sundry.

I've done all that. Party officer, elected official, signature gatherer, etc. The system really is rigged to prevent change.

That's not a bug; it's a feature.

Which means all those who say that we should vote if we are unsatisfied with the system are talking out their ass.

If they seek to imply that voting alone will change the 'unsatisfactory' elements of the system, then that is probably true.

At the end of the day, government of the people, by the people, for the people is not going to look much like government of the people, by the people, for the benefit any one particular individual would look.

The idea is that everyone pulls in their preferred direction, and the consensus is the direction the country ends up going; it doesn't work very well, but by and large it is better than picking a dictator and going in his direction with no regard for anybody else's opinion - which is the only other model of government that has been tried.

People seem to take for granted that they have the right to complain about the system; but that right is a novelty - until 1215, the whole idea of rights for anyone who wasn't king was a non-starter, and simply saying something vaguely critical of authority could get you killed or imprisoned indefinitely without trial anywhere in the world. from 1215 up to the 1780s, the 'right' to complain was granted only to the nobility - and then only in a small part of the world. The idea that any adult could have a say (no matter how small) in the way their society was governed is only about a century old; and it still only applies to a small fraction of the world.

So complain away - your right to do so was paid for with people's lives. But don't imagine that being told to "STFU if you didn't cast your vote" is somehow an impingement on your rights. An impingement on your rights is more readily detected than that, as it usually entails iron bars in the window and/or shackles about your wrists and ankles - if you are one of the fortunate few who is allowed to survive the process at all.

 

[bilby]

Right, that's exactly my point.

If nobody votes, the system does indeed die.

My act of voting or not voting does not create this outcome. By insinuating it does you are making an irrational or emotional argument.

Unless you do think my not voting causes everyone else not to vote in which case you are venturing into the delusional.

I didn't suggest that it did; I have stated the facts (any you have agreed with them); all of the emotional inferences are on your part.

So, if we're all agreed your point is completely irrelevant we should probably just ignore it.

I'll leave the issue of why you brought it up to you and your therapist or priest.

It is clearly irrelevant to your pet peeve; and as it doesn't help nor harm your soapboxing on this topic, you probably should ignore it.

Others can (and will) decide whether it has a wider relevance; but as you are apparently only interested in (once again) pointing out the obvious - to the point where you (once again) drown out those trying to have a discussion about the non-obvious facets of modern representative democracy - it would definitely be best if you were to ignore it, yes.

 

[dismal]

Right, that's exactly my point.

If nobody votes, the system does indeed die.

My act of voting or not voting does not create this outcome. By insinuating it does you are making an irrational or emotional argument.

Unless you do think my not voting causes everyone else not to vote in which case you are venturing into the delusional.

I didn't suggest that it did; I have stated the facts (any you have agreed with them); all of the emotional inferences are on your part.

So, if we're all agreed your point is completely irrelevant we should probably just ignore it.

I'll leave the issue of why you brought it up to you and your therapist or priest.

It is clearly irrelevant to your pet peeve; and as it doesn't help nor harm your soapboxing on this topic, you probably should ignore it.

Others can (and will) decide whether it has a wider relevance; but as you are apparently only interested in (once again) pointing out the obvious - to the point where you (once again) drown out those trying to have a discussion about the non-obvious facets of modern representative democracy - it would definitely be best if you were to ignore it, yes.

Since my decision whether to vote (aka "the topic") clearly and obviously does not cause everyone else not to vote your attempt to bring it up in this discussion clearly has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic.

End of story.