Here there be rants. There will be Freeman stuff, Lawful Rebellion stuff and Random stuff. I am rebelling because I want my country back. My lawful obligations are as follows: “together with the community of the whole realm, distrain and distress us in all possible ways, namely, by seizing our castles, lands, possessions, and in any other way they can, until redress has been obtained as they see fit…”
Article 61 Magna Carta 1215
March 03, 2011
I'm Sorry
Remember this video on voting day.
Remember that voting for them gives them legitimacy.
Remember that voting for them gives them your consent.
Remember that voting for them simply extends your enslavement.
Remember when you do vote that you are to blame for all that follows.
Remember that by abstaining you are giving them the leeway they need to do whatever they like. By abstaining, you are saying "I don't care what you do"
Under my government, voting would be compulsory. Only that way can we move towards true democracy.
F.U.@23:51 By abstaining, you are saying "I don't care what you do"
That's right 'they' don't care about us or the nation.They are just spectators to the real movers @ shakers in the UNELECTED council of commissars of the EU.
They no longer represent me or anything I hold dear,so I have a duty to say 'NO'.
Francis urquhart - you have got to be joking! Compulsory voting has not only empirically proven itself to be, at best ineffective and at worst counterproductive, but it is, by objective ethical standards, a gross and humiliating oppression. The slave owner legitimising his coercive rule with the sham of representative democracy is disgusting enough without him forcing us to participate in this mechanism of our own enslavement. Using the gun of coercion (theres state) to solve 'problems' of human organisation is unnecessary and evil. Allowing the slaves to choose who points the gun at them does not legitimise this backward system let alone optimise it, as you seem to suggest. Thousands of years of history proves that it is not simply a matter of giving the gun to the right guy. If it were how come we haven't perfected the art of state government yet?
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
"There is a difference between democracy and freedom. Freedom is not measured by the ability to vote. It is measured by the breadth of those things on which we do not vote."
To read more anti-democracy rantings see my blog post on the subject
If I am accosted by a hooded stranger in the street and offered the choice of 'a punch in the face' or 'a knife in the throat' and I opt for the former, have I consented to the punch in the face?
I may have chosen the punch, but I did so under duress. The lack of a feasible outside option- 'neither be punched in the face nor knifed in the throat'- , in my view, makes the choice of 'a punch in the face' merely a choice, not consent. In this way one can interpret voting as self defence.
"Ballot box = suggestion box for slaves" as Stef Molyneaux says. Francis - they do what they want regardless. The promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty springs to mind.
If you endorse, you consent. That must be obvious to you.
You consent to them robbing you every month. You consent to 5.2 million cameras. You consent to the illegal wars. You consent to being locked up for 28 days without a scrap of evidence. You consent to parliament giving away our nation to an unelected EU.
Not voting is withholding that consent. It cannot be otherwise.
I tend to see the problem of 'voting is consent' because there is no way of separating people who deliberetely refuse to play the charade from those people who simply can't be arsed to get off the sofa. I tend towards the idea of writing 'none of these' on the ballot paper. That's why my AV ballot will be returned with a leave the EU message.
12 comments:
Remember that by abstaining you are giving them the leeway they need to do whatever they like. By abstaining, you are saying "I don't care what you do"
Under my government, voting would be compulsory. Only that way can we move towards true democracy.
Captain,
F.U.@23:51 By abstaining, you are saying "I don't care what you do"
That's right 'they' don't care about us or the nation.They are just spectators to the real movers @ shakers in the UNELECTED council of commissars of the EU.
They no longer represent me or anything I hold dear,so I have a duty to say 'NO'.
Some real CHOICE in the voting booth would be nice...
How about writing on the ballot paper "None of the candidates available on this list get my consent" ?
Francis urquhart - you have got to be joking!
Compulsory voting has not only empirically proven itself to be, at best ineffective and at worst counterproductive, but it is, by objective ethical standards, a gross and humiliating oppression.
The slave owner legitimising his coercive rule with the sham of representative democracy is disgusting enough without him forcing us to participate in this mechanism of our own enslavement.
Using the gun of coercion (theres state) to solve 'problems' of human organisation is unnecessary and evil. Allowing the slaves to choose who points the gun at them does not legitimise this backward system let alone optimise it, as you seem to suggest.
Thousands of years of history proves that it is not simply a matter of giving the gun to the right guy. If it were how come we haven't perfected the art of state government yet?
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
"There is a difference between democracy and freedom. Freedom is not measured by the ability to vote. It is measured by the breadth of those things on which we do not vote."
To read more anti-democracy rantings see my blog post on the subject
http://anangryanarchist.blogspot.com/2011/02/why-anarchy-is-more-democratic-than.html
I don't buy the 'voting is consent' argument.
If I am accosted by a hooded stranger in the street and offered the choice of 'a punch in the face' or 'a knife in the throat' and I opt for the former, have I consented to the punch in the face?
I may have chosen the punch, but I did so under duress. The lack of a feasible outside option- 'neither be punched in the face nor knifed in the throat'- , in my view, makes the choice of 'a punch in the face' merely a choice, not consent. In this way one can interpret voting as self defence.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
Brilliant. I am nicking that one.
"Ballot box = suggestion box for slaves" as Stef Molyneaux says.
Francis - they do what they want regardless. The promised referendum on the Lisbon Treaty springs to mind.
Matthew,
Your vote endorses everything.
You endorse the candidate.
You endorse the party.
You endorse the voting mechanism.
You endorse parliament.
You endorse all of their decisions.
If you endorse, you consent. That must be obvious to you.
You consent to them robbing you every month. You consent to 5.2 million cameras. You consent to the illegal wars. You consent to being locked up for 28 days without a scrap of evidence. You consent to parliament giving away our nation to an unelected EU.
Not voting is withholding that consent. It cannot be otherwise.
CR.
I prefer this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuxQ2d879pw&feature=related
"None of the Above"
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
Liberty is a well armed sheep - can't remember who's was the original quote
I tend to see the problem of 'voting is consent' because there is no way of separating people who deliberetely refuse to play the charade from those people who simply can't be arsed to get off the sofa.
I tend towards the idea of writing 'none of these' on the ballot paper.
That's why my AV ballot will be returned with a leave the EU message.
Post a Comment