You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The "If you don't vote, you can't complain fallacy"
And if all 4 candidates are people you don't want making decisions about your life?
I could have just as easily created another 2 candidates in my blog who were also unseemly.
Your argument seems to be "This system is awful, but its going to remain awful, so you may as well put your statistically insignificant vote in the box in the hope that the least awful person may win...which of course legitimises the awful system we have"
...Or am I missing something?
Yes, you're missing the fact that you're making up the example to fail.
Look, nothing is perfect. Let's say you were shopping for a new car, but one had slightly uncomfortable seats, another had shitty stereo, the third had no cupholders and the fourth completely lacked trunk space. In that situation do you give up and walk everywhere complaining about having to walk?
More to the point, in reality the Libertarian party would do more of what you want than any other party. So all of you anarchists collectively, whose vote might not collectively be statistically insignificant decide not to vote and let the big government Republicans and Democrats win. You could vote in a Ron Paul or Gary Johnson who'd reduce the size of the government and get rid of laws against drugs and reduce taxes. It's not everything you want, but it's on the right path and if your ideas work out people would see life getting better and be more likely to stick to that path.
Instead you opt out until you can change everything instantly, and lose everything... then complain about it endlessly.
If every single Jewish person voted against the NAZIs,, it wouldnt have mattered because the Jews were in a small minority.
Democracy means nothing if you're a small minority.
10% of people cannot stop 90% of people subjucating them via democracy.
If every single person who didn't vote voted Johnson(for the sake of argument), he'd still struggle to win.(and of course not every non-voter is a libertarian)
Which of course brings us back to the concept that more people voting for something isn't a moral reason for implementing your beliefs on others!
You seem to be willfully ignoring this fact.
I don't want a nice slaveowner like Johnson who'll whip us less and make the plantation nicer.
Who do I vote for if I don't wan't a master?
Wheres the none of the above option?
If there was, then you might tempt me out to put my statistically insignificant piece of paper in a box every 4 years.
I could keep shopping until I found a car I liked...or choose a bus....or train...or a taxi...or cycle...or choose none of the above and walk
No one is going to force me to choose between a few vehicle options and then force that option on me because other people happen to like that option!
Yes, the Libertarian party is less evil...they're the nicest slaveowners around. But what if I dont want to partake in evil? What if I feel I dont need a slaveowner?
There clearly arent enough Ron Paul or Gary Johnson supporters right now to win, so people like me are forced to live under some narcissistic sociopathic moron like Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton.
If you and others want to live under them...fine.
The problem is when you force others to.
The Jews didn't vote for the NAZI party...they still had to be ruled by them though.
Thats the system you're arguing for and saying I should get involved in.
Yes but I could also extend my example like you would, and state there was something you disliked about all of those options. See why your logic fails?
But if you think about it, you've ceded control over your transportation at least for anything outside of walking/biking distance. The bus/train company determines what the schedule of travel is, and taxi's choose what kind of vehicle you ride in. By not choosing a car, you've actually ceded control to the bus/taxi/train companies.
Correction: There clearly aren't enough Ron Paul or Gary Johnson supporters who actually vote right no to win. All I hear is how good Johnson would be followed by a complain that their vote would be wasted, or people complaining that the government isn't limited enough by people who abstain from the system like you.
If you all voted, he'd be doing much better in the polls. Furthermore momemtum is a thing, even if you lost this election Libertarians would have more legitimacy next election. Republicans who don't vote third party "because their vote would be wasted" would consider it.
Essentially you're complaining about a system you aren't really trying to change. It's just whining at that point.
I wonder how many Jews didn't vote for Hindenburg (seriously, that was his name!) because their votes wouldn't matter?