Archive for the 'Anarcho-capitalism' Category

Date: June 19th, 2008, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism

Chicago, IL
By A.B. Dada
—
On the LRC this morning, Paul Hein posts an interesting article titled Change? regarding his views that staying home on election day is the best way to promote change in the system. He states “If people want change, let them stay home on election day. The outcome will be no different, but the rulers might get the message that people no longer want to participate in the charade of voting. Perhaps – and wouldn’t this be wonderful!! – they might even get the idea that the people have become fed up with the very concept of government!” While this may sound true on its face, I feel it is completely false. I agree with Hein’s view that voting hasn’t instilled a sense of change, ever, at least in recent generations. I also don’t believe that not voting will do the opposite.

According to Wikipedia’s article Elections in the United States, in the last Presidential election in 2004, 122,295,345 voters turned out to the polls, or 59% of the legal voting population. Not quite a super-majority amount of voters actually voted, with 29.93% of eligible voters actually picking the winner. Since there wasn’t even a majority of eligible voters on the side of the winner (George W. Bush, if you weren’t aware), cutting back on the voter numbers would have no effect on promoting change. If anything, it would just make the world think of the U.S. as lazier and less involved.

Because Bush won with 50.73% of the actual voters, he can proclaim that he received the majority of the vote. It’s so close, but even if he received 48% of actual voters, the winner would still proclaim a mandate by the public. Staying home does nothing. Staying home means you’re not counted at all, except in the tiny figure that shows the amount of eligible voters taking the time to make a mandate.

My view on voting hasn’t changed in years. In a previous article years ago, I stated my opinion: Why I Vote. I used to believe that voting for the underdog made sense: your vote was counted, and it was a vote for change, many believe. But I quickly realized that the small amount of voters for a specific underdog (and underrepresented in the media candidate) meant nothing as the media doesn’t even post the percentage returns for the minor candidates. What a waste.

Instead, my view on voting is one that shows the frustration of the voters out there: the vote against everyone. In most states, write-in votes don’t count for anything, but they’re still tallied votes. I like to write my own name in, everywhere. If you’re against that idea, write in Mickey Mouse or Jesus Christ or Michael Jackson. Let the precinct managers deal with counting it, if they even bother. Be part of the exit polls to skew the media’s pronouncement of the winners (I like to pick one of the two major candidates as who I voted for if I am queried at an exit poll). Go ahead and put a bumper sticker on your car for one of the major candidates, or even both!

If more unconcerned-concerned non-voters would turn out to “throw away their vote” for themselves or a non-candidate, the media may have to take note. In that last Presidential election in 2004, 41% of eligible voters didn’t show up. 29.93% picked Bush. A few percent less picked Kerry. The non-voters had the mandate: we don’t like anyone. Wouldn’t it have been better if these voters would have just punched the equivalent of “none of the above” by writing in themselves or their favorite cartoon character?

I think so. I think this is the only possible way to proclaim to the world that we, too, are fed up with what our authoritarian leaders are doing. By staying home, we tell everyone (and ourselves) that we’re exactly the fat, lazy, irresponsible children that most consider us. By going to the polls and anti-voting, you’re telling the media, the masses and the world that you’re responsible enough to take 15 minutes out of your year, grab a ballot, and say exactly what you’re thinking: “I hate the system. I hate all the politicians. I despise the voters who think they’re instilling safety and freedom through a coercive act. I don’t want more of the same, I want less of the same. Far less.”

So while I like that Hein believes that non-voting is the only path to change, I have to disagree. I believe that the only path to change is to co-opt the system by voting no against everything: every candidate, every tax increase, every referendum, every judge, everything. Vote no by writing yourself in. Vote no by writing in your neighbor. Vote no by writing in MLK or Gandhi. What’s the worst that can happen?

Comments: none

Date: December 17th, 2007, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism, Ron Paul

At a church I was making a delivery at this weekend, an assistant pastor mentioned to me that he’s hearing more and more about Ron Paul, but still hates his foreign policy. He asked me the status quo neoconservative question: “Don’t you think it’s wiser to take the war over there than to bring the war over here?”

My answer was: “No. Bring the war over here.”

He was shocked. Literally floored. With his mouth agape, and before he could respond, I told him I’d post a blog post for him, and him alone, but share it with the public. I think it’s a worthy post to share with others, because it opens up a realistic eye to this so-called war, and the definition of “them.”

Read the rest of this article at the anarcho-capitalism site.

Comments: none

Date: December 15th, 2007, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism

The news this morning is covering Governor Schwarzenegger’s call for a fiscal emergency in California, due to a possible budget shortfall of $14 billion. When I tried to visit the State of California’s budget website, it was down. It’s big news, from a big State.

But is California in financial trouble? Growing foreclosures pushing as much as a 200% growth year over year, shrinking wages, rampant Federal Reserve monetary inflation, and continued consumer overspending may give people the idea that California is in trouble, but that’s just not true. The people of California are not experiencing a fiscal emergency, the government is.

I call repeatedly for people to understand that you are not your government, and they are not you. What defines you in an economic sense is merely those around you who you pay for products or services, or who pays you for products or services. That defines an economy: the billions of quick interactions that exchange products/services for money.

Read the rest of this article at the anarcho-capitalism site.

Comments: none

Date: December 11th, 2007, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism

An interesting question came into my email inbox yesterday from someone who must have come across an older article I wrote castigating the idea of voting, and why I’m an anti-voter (meaning I do vote, but I write my own name in on every line). The question he asked was simple: “If you don’t agree with the process of voting, why not recommend a change in the process?” I emailed him back right away, but it piqued my curiosity into what others thought of my ideas of “fixing” Democracy, if it would even work.

First of all, I believe Democracy is an evil word, based solely on the idea that 51% of the people in a voting district can tell 49% of the people what to do. To me, it doesn’t work. The only Democracy I could theoretically accept would be one that operated under a strong barrier to unlimited power. The U.S. Constitution, as well as many State Constitutions, theoretically were formed with the barrier to unlimited power in mind, but we can see that they’ve all been stretched way beyond their original intent. You can’t stop powerful people from pushing their powers a tiny bit at a time, which snowballs into tyranny. Democratic tyranny is worse than Dictatorial tyranny, since you can’t easily blame millions for bilking the fruits of your labors. I’d rather blame on Dictator than try to convince hundreds of millions.

Read the rest of this article at the anarcho-capitalism site.

Comments: none

Date: December 6th, 2007, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism

I’ve decided that from now on, my official title will be “President of the United States of America.” I hereby declare that title for myself, and for every person within the borders of any U.S. territory or state. Including illegal aliens. You, kind reader, are also the President of the United States of America. Your non-English speaking neighbor is, too. So are his kids.

Why have I had to make this declaration? Because I’ve noticed that Americans, of which I include those born here, abroad, and those who skipped over the border illegaly, have forgotten so much about how this Republic exists. We are not a nation, we are a Republic of 50 Nations and a few territories that are not pro-freedom enough to realize that they, too, are independent nations.

Read this entire article at the anarcho-capitalism site.

Comments: none

Date: December 5th, 2007, Filed under Anarcho-capitalism

Since Mr. Schweitzer has agreed to discuss Just War Doctrine, I’ve spent a day talking with the wife and a few good friends about the proper angle to portray my viewpoints on Augustine’s popular theory. I believe that the Just War Doctrine is immoral, and unbiblical, while Curtis takes the opposite view.

At first, I thought I had a slam dunk, but after discussions with others, I realized that my primary debate tool is useless in this venue. For those who know me personally or deeply, they are aware that I prescribe to a minority view on Christianity and the Bible, notably the Preterist or Covenant eschatological doctrinal view. I assume that Curtis, as well as most Christian readers here, prescribe to the more common Dispensationalist doctrinal viewpoint on Biblical matters. This complicates the issue significantly for me, but does not necessary make it an impossibility.

Read this entire article at the anarcho-capitalism site.

Comments: 1