Ron Paul's League of NON-Voters Ron Paul recognizes "principled non-voters" but had no suggestion for HOW they can become vocal. Perhaps sending POSTCARDS to your Senator and Representative and the Supreme Court declaring "I refuse to vote because there is not an inflated dime's worth of difference between the two parties." might be a way to become vocal.
http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=483
Ron Paul Statement to the National Press Club
[snip]
There is only one way that these issues can get the attention they deserve: the silent majority must become the vocal majority.
This message can be sent to our leaders by not participating in the Great Distraction—the quadrennial campaign and election of an American President without a choice.
Since a principled non-voter sends a message, we must count them and recognize the message they are sending as well. The non-voters need to hold their own "election" by starting a "League of Non-voters" and explain their principled reasons for opting out of this charade of the presidential elective process. They just might get a bigger membership than anyone would guess.
-----------------------------
His suggestion regarding a "League" DID inspire me to create some "easy to use" Postcards and Note Cards to get the League started.
Use "as-is" or FILL IN YOUR OWN REASONS and send a notice to each of the Congress Critters of your choice. And don't forget the Supreme Court!! They decided Election-2000 without any Constitutional authority to do so.
Use First Class Note Cards (envelopes included) to keep the Government Post Office from "accidentally losing" them.
Purchase is NOT necessary. The issue is not about selling stuff. Please feel free to copy any of the images here and print them on your own printer.http://www.cafepress.com/artemiszuna/5682690
So let me get this straight. You advocate telling people you are not going to challenge or hold accountable, that you are not going to challenge or hold them accountable?
You'd bet better off sending them to your family.
If I'm a politician, and you tell me to shape up, but you're also a non-voter, I'm going to laugh at you.
When Dr. Paul said send them a message, I don't think he was saying "Tell them you are letting them off the hook by not voting".
liberty student: So let me get this straight. You advocate telling people you are not going to challenge or hold accountable, that you are not going to challenge or hold them accountable? You'd bet better off sending them to your family. If I'm a politician, and you tell me to shape up, but you're also a non-voter, I'm going to laugh at you. When Dr. Paul said send them a message, I don't think he was saying "Tell them you are letting them off the hook by not voting".
That's not a misrepresentation at all; equating non-voting to "letting them off hook" automatically assumes voting instantly makes a difference vs. non-voting, which is false (just as false as assuming non-voting automatically makes a difference versus voting). I agree with LS that the gesture is pointless; but I think it's also symbolic. However, it would be naive to make this out more than just a symbolic action though.I think eventually those involved with the League of Non-Voter's will realize those making this out act beyond symbolism probably took RP's call to "send a message" too literally. The literal response is fairly humorous, and I think it would help if the postcards sent acknowledged the futility of such in a tongue-in-cheek manner.
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
I was just suggesting an action item for what Ron Paul recognizes as "principled non-voters". My personal view on voting is this:
Do something, refuse to vote!
Please do not conflate “NOT VOTING” with “DOING NOTHING”. Based on personal observation over the past 50+ years, VOTING has accomplished absolutely NOTHING except to deceive a lot of people into thinking that the USA federal and various state, county and city governments are actually being controlled by voters and/or written constitutions. It should be painfully obvious that we live in a militarized police state and the governments and their courts operate without any control whatsoever.As for "doing nothing", there is a concept commonly known as FREE YOURSELF. Harry Browne’s book “How I Found Freedom In An Unfree World” has to be the foremost proponent of this concept. For those who want to “do something”, consider what it takes to FREE YOURSELF...
That is an excerpt from these articles that I wrote about voting:
"Can there be a better time to STOP VOTING?" http://tinyurl.com/6pkaof "Apathy? Hell NO!" http://tinyurl.com/5am9zy
"Can there be a better time to STOP VOTING?" http://tinyurl.com/6pkaof
"Apathy? Hell NO!" http://tinyurl.com/5am9zy
Nitroadict:That's not a misreprenstation at all; equatting non-voting to "letting them off hook" automatically assumes voting instantly makes a difference vs. non-voting, which is false (just as false as assuming non-voting automatically makes a difference versus voting).
If I am a politician, an incumbent at that, the last thing I think I am going to lose my job to is anarchy and statelessness. I'm probably more concerned that I will lose an election. So when some guy writes me a letter or sends me a postcard that says, I won't vote you out, but I'm really ticked off, I'm probably going to ignore it.
liberty student: Nitroadict:That's not a misreprenstation at all; equatting non-voting to "letting them off hook" automatically assumes voting instantly makes a difference vs. non-voting, which is false (just as false as assuming non-voting automatically makes a difference versus voting). If I am a politician, an incumbent at that, the last thing I think I am going to lose my job to is anarchy and statelessness. I'm probably more concerned that I will lose an election. So when some guy writes me a letter or sends me a postcard that says, I won't vote you out, but I'm really ticked off, I'm probably going to ignore it.
Indeed, I find the thought of a politican recieving a mass of mail informing him he has less potential votes for himself (although also less votes for his rival politicans) as possibly stymieing but nothing more. I do think however this would be a good "first reflex" act that the Leauge of Non-Voters could do. Anyone who thinks this postcard idea is all that's needed is kidding themselves :).
And SOME politicians (being mostly pragmatists) might even consider the non-voters as an unmined resource, needing only a good reason to go to the polls and vote.
Ron Paul's appeal is an example that politicans will ignore at their own peril.
Come on, we've been through this so many times and you should know better by now. Non-voting does not equate to "not challenging or holding people accountable" - this assumes that voting is the only way to do this, or that it does it at all. It isn't the only way and it doesn't meaningfully do so. Blaming principled non-voters who aren't voting precisely for the purpose of demonstrating their non-support for not putting up a challenge is silly. Stop it.
It's not the non-voters who are implictly or ideologically sanctioning the status quo here, it is precisely you who is doing so with your reoccuring assumption that voting makes a differance (while simultaneously trying maintain a criticism of democracy; contradiction for the lose) and your reoccuring demonization of people who refuse to participate in the very system that you claim to oppose to begin with. It just doesn't add up logically.
For me, one of the main motivations for voting and being registered to vote is the possibility of winding up on a jury. If I get a chance to set someone free who has been charged with a "crime" that is non-violent and consensual in nature that will be worth my time. I want that chance. It could save someone’s life – it could save someone from getting raped in prison. You can talk principles till you are blue in the face but they don’t mean squat compared to the chance to keep a non-violent person from going to jail.
NOTE TO THOSE OUTSIDE THE USA:You may be confused by my connection of voting to juries. In the United States, being registered to vote also means you are part of your community’s jury pool.
I am an eklektarchist not an anarchist.
Educational Pamphlet Mises Group
Fantastic post. I will make sure I get my chance to nullify and save someone's life.
I don't consider myself "principled" nor really know if it will send a message by not voting.
I just can't be bothered and don't find supporting candidates or voting a good use of scarce time and resources.
I could be wrong and maybe there's another amazing idea out there. But that's just what I've decided.
Brainpolice:Come on, we've been through this so many times and you should know better by now. Non-voting does not equate to "not challenging or holding people accountable" - this assumes that voting is the only way to do this, or that it does it at all. It isn't the only way and it doesn't meaningfully do so. Blaming principled non-voters who aren't voting precisely for the purpose of demonstrating their non-support for not putting up a challenge is silly. Stop it. It's not the non-voters who are implictly or ideologically sanctioning the status quo here, it is precisely you who is doing so with your reoccuring assumption that voting makes a differance (while simultaneously trying maintain a criticism of democracy; contradiction for the lose) and your reoccuring demonization of people who refuse to participate in the very system that you claim to oppose to begin with. It just doesn't add up logically.
Congrats on taking a selective quote out of context, and then writing a self-indulgent little rant about it.
Does it make you feel like a big man when you troll?
ryanpatgray:For me, one of the main motivations for voting and being registered to vote is the possibility of winding up on a jury.
I'm not registered to vote nor have I ever been since I moved to Arizona but they still sent me an 'invitation' to do my civic duty.
I think they use DMV records or something.
liberty student: Fantastic post. I will make sure I get my chance to nullify and save someone's life.
Thank you, I hope you get a chance to save the life of a non-violent person life - or at least keep a non-violent person out of prison.
Anonymous Coward: ryanpatgray:For me, one of the main motivations for voting and being registered to vote is the possibility of winding up on a jury. I'm not registered to vote nor have I ever been since I moved to Arizona but they still sent me an 'invitation' to do my civic duty. I think they use DMV records or something.
Maybe it varies from state to state. In every state I have lived it (it is my understanding) that it is based on voting records.
liberty student: Brainpolice:Come on, we've been through this so many times and you should know better by now. Non-voting does not equate to "not challenging or holding people accountable" - this assumes that voting is the only way to do this, or that it does it at all. It isn't the only way and it doesn't meaningfully do so. Blaming principled non-voters who aren't voting precisely for the purpose of demonstrating their non-support for not putting up a challenge is silly. Stop it. It's not the non-voters who are implictly or ideologically sanctioning the status quo here, it is precisely you who is doing so with your reoccuring assumption that voting makes a differance (while simultaneously trying maintain a criticism of democracy; contradiction for the lose) and your reoccuring demonization of people who refuse to participate in the very system that you claim to oppose to begin with. It just doesn't add up logically. Congrats on taking a selective quote out of context, and then writing a self-indulgent little rant about it. Does it make you feel like a big man when you troll?
Anyone who looks can see that Brainpolice did NOT "selectively quote out of context". As for being a troll, "liberty" stud has posted nothing but emotional rants and contributed nothing constructive since his very first post in this discussion thread. It is interesting how well he(?) described himself while attempting to project his own personality onto others.
I also live in Arizona and have been called for jury duty twice. Both times I was dismissed after I said no to the "can you judge only the truth of the facts and not the law" question. If I go again I might lie simply to get on the jury. For me it is a very hard decision to make. Lieing is against my ethical system, but I can't stand that innocent people are punished the way they are...
"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay
Actually, the quote was taken out of context as I wouldn't be attacking principled non-voters since I now consider myself one, or at the very least, someone who sees little or no progress possible from voting.
My opposite likely knows that, or has overlooked it, in order to imply that I have an issue with non-voters.
On the contrary, I do not.
The issue is, politicians likely only see electoral defeat as a threat, and so announcing that you will not use the electoral system to defeat them, makes the threat somewhat hollow.
There is nothing wrong with campaigning for or against, voting for or against, but you're sticking your finger in your pocket of a transparent wind breaker, trying to mimic a gun and hold someone up. They can see you don't have a weapon, they are not likely scared of a pointing finger pretending to be a gun.
If you're a Paulista, and you're motivated to lean on the system, I salute you. Many are not willing to put their time or money where their mouth is. But that doesn't mean every idea on first glance is great, and I assumed you were open to criticism. If I assumed wrong, I apologize.
I actually like the idea that you spun out a few weeks ago, LS: protesting the vote. Announcing that you are not going to vote won't do much, but actively trying to persuade people not to may have more of an effect. It would be a good way to get libertarian/anarchist ideas out in public, at least; it would definitely start some conversations.
Market anarchist, Linux geek, aspiring Perl hacker, and student of the neo-Aristotelians, the classical individualist anarchists, and the Austrian school.
“Mock teh Vote” gear now on sale!
liberty student: “Mock teh Vote” gear now on sale!
I LIKE that!
Vote on all the other items on the ballot, but leave the ones you dont want to vote for blank. They count the ballots, and your will be counted but the vote count for say the president will be one vote short.
Registering to vote and refusing to do so will accomplish the same thing.
Leaving a field blank makes it easy for Florida-type vote counters in every state to chose their own candidate--does anyone think they would resist the temptation?
"He who casts the votes decides nothing. He who counts the votes, decides everything." Josef Stalin--voting expert.
all ballots have write in blanks. put our own name.
I will be writing in "none of the above" my district is weak for congress. Not a libertarian running for senate so I will vote the Constitutional Party guy, even though they reek of pietism. No offense to any faithfull out there, it is my stand that liberty need not the crutches of god. Has anyone read Sy Leon's book, None of the Above?
If I was a pacifist, I would not vote, as it is "an act of aggression against ones fellow man". I'm not, so I will again vote in self defense.
I expect poor results on the voting front, as is the norm in voting. It makes me wish less people voted, as most fail to understand what it is they are voting on. I'm telling folks that inquire of me as to how I will vote that, "I refuse to vote republican or democrat, as it is a nod for tyranny".
I really think we need more cats to get some strings, and start running for office.
Individualism Rocks
Bank Run:"an act of aggression against ones fellow man"
No, it is not, sir.
Gene: all ballots have write in blanks. put our own name.
Not in Oklahoma. Writing in a name just spoils the ballot. And it looks like there will be no third party or independent presidential candidates in Okahoma once again, just like in 2004. Am I supposed to vote for Obama if I think McCain will take Oklahoma?
It looks like those living in Oklahoma have an ESPECIALLY good reason to consider the points I made in my articles:
If this is true, and if I lived in Oklahoma, I would not vote. I agree. There is no reason to be forced to choose between two evils.
That is retarded. I am writing a letter to your board of elections tonight!
Gene: That is retarded. I am writing a letter to your board of elections tonight!
I sincerely hope your letter is more effective than the legislation, lawsuits and ballot access petitions that have been tried in the last 30+ years.
Maybe if we can convince enough people to write, who knows?