Independent Iowa Music Discussion for e-Scenesters
https://515crew.com/msgbrd/
elliot wrote:Yeah, it's SOOOO STUPID to vote for someone. Why would anybody try to get someone they don't like out of office? Buncha sheep.
if all you do is vote, yes that is stupid.elliot wrote:Yeah, it's SOOOO STUPID to vote for someone. Why would anybody try to get someone they don't like out of office? Buncha sheep.
actually, the Official CrimethInc. response might look something like this:el rhino wrote:Yeah, if you consult the Crimethinc manual on page 173, third paragraph it clearly states that taking part in a democratic election is stupid.
or perhaps:The bush era is coming to an end, and once again the spectacle of a presidential election captivates the people of the United States.
Enticed by vague rhetoric of hope and change, against a backdrop of increasing
precarious and desperate global crises, millions will rally to elect a new
politician to solve the problems the last batch of politicians created, or at
least failed to alleviate. While we already don't have much of a choice in the
two-party framework, the politicians and the mass media controlled by their
major donors assure us that we don't have any other meaningful way to make a
change than to go along and vote for the lesser of two evils. Certainly, the
urgency of domestic and global crises demands that we all take responsibility
for radically changing the world.
But is voting the only, or even the most effective tool that we have?
***************************************************************************
===================================
Even if our candidate doesn't win, we can
impact government policy by showing
that we're concerned about the issues our
candidate stands for.
===================================
If all you can imagine to do about an issue that
concerns you is to vote for a candidate, and even
if your vote actually mattered statistically, the
best that an election "victory" would ensure
is their place in power, not what they will do
with it. Votes don't give politicians incentive to take action; when people bypass the established means of change and act directly
to transform society, politicians must then
scramble to catch up and prove their relevance
by confirming the changes that the people
have enacted. And the belief that we can hold
politicians accountable through the threat
of withholding our votes in the next election
rests on the fallacy that being voted out of
office actually poses a threat to a member
of the ruling class. Rather than investing
our energy into electing the least objectionable candidate, we can organize social
movements that more effectively pressure any
ruler that comes along to make the changes we
prioritize--or, better yet, make those changes
ourselves.
This election season, the politicians who piloted us into unwinnable wars,
ecological catastrophes, and grievous imbalances of wealth and power will
attempt to recast themselves as the only ones who can rescue us from them. If
Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain portray their values and stances
regarding the war in Iraq, global warming, and the economy in opposition to each
other, it's only to mask their shared ruling-class interests: securing US global
military dominance, keeping political power for politicians over the rest of us,
and upholding the interests of the wealthy corporations that seek to control
economic and political power not just in the US, but around the world. In the
end, no matter who we vote for, we will be electing the same system of rulers
that facilitates war, ecological devastation, and the increasing disparity
between rich and poor.
From the fundamental similarity between the interests of the two ruling parties
emerges the central paradox of the election: when the compelling crises that
profoundly concern the electorate are so obviously facilitated by the last batch
of Democratic and Republican politicians, how can the current candidates present themselves as likely hopes to solve them? With current popular opinion
solidly against the war and anxious about global warming, the candidates have
an interest in paying lip service towards finding solutions to these problems.
But they find themselves in a difficult position, since the economic and
government/military interests that fund, defend, and enforce Democratic and
Republican power are the same ones underlying imperialist occupations and
catastrophic climate change. So the importance of this election isn't how the
politicians will solve these problems: they won't. The significance of this
election lies in how the Democrats and Republicans will spin these urgent crises
to retain their seats of power, and how the rest of us will refuse their false
promises.
@nonymous wrote: if all you do is vote, yes that is stupid.
nah, elliot's fine.Yeah, Elliot needs more politically provocative avatars and quotes on messageboards.
you confuse me. you talk alot on the internet about rebellion/opposition but youre a business owner. thats confusing. and you dont vote. doesnt that make you a subject?@nonymous wrote:I know some of you did. It's time to either justify your decision, or apologize for it. I'm not really looking to argue with anyone, I just feel that you owe the rest of the world one of those two, considering the current state of America, which no sane person could say is good.
joseph wrote:you confuse me. you talk alot on the internet about rebellion/opposition but youre a business owner. thats confusing.