...But if everyone else thinks that's the case, both "not voting" and "being silent" are really, really, really, really bad strategies that reliably and repeatedly result in "the worst possible outcome."

This is because cybernetic systems are not bound by simple logic, like the hard sciences are. All cybernetic systems are inherently capable of dishonesty and adaptation. So, if they have convinced an army of violent people that votes should determine outcomes, you have two choices if the outcomes they favor are evil:

1. Physically defeat their armies (the cops, the military, and all the backup they can call and muster from their army of idiot conformist followers). This avenue is likely to be fruitful right now, if you can build superintelligences that bootstrap from "sensory input only" and connect them to a weak but highly manipulable robot body with the capacity for fine motor skills. Such "artilects" could then solve the problems inherent in rule by sociopathic primate, using force justly. (Such as by becoming the supreme police/military power, and disallowing successful drug prosecutions. Contact me for more on how this might be done with minimal violence if you're close to "leading force tech" described here: http://e-drexler.com/d/06/00/EOC/EOC_Chapter_11.html#section02of05 )
2. Convince those idiot conformist followers to stop assisting the status quo power. Since 2a) you cannot convince significant numbers of people to stop voting, and 2b) a good case cannot be made that a small demographic of non-voting results in optimal (or even good) outcomes, one should advocate benevolent voting (voting for voluntaryist candidates, boycotts of evil industries and the government taxes that often pay them, civil disobedience, and getting seated on juries and voting "not guilty" in victimless crime cases).