You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Voters, You Empower Your Enemies
Feel free to enlighten me. Or at least say something with a hint of substance to it.
Feel free to enlighten me. Or at least say something with a hint of substance to it.
So what are you trying to say in this post other than calling voters useful idiots?
That they voted for the wrong people? Or they shouldn't have voted at all? Or something else?
To my mind it's little more than an insult to most people. With no advice or recommendations as to what they should or could do to to rectify the situation.
And do you really think that voting will rectify anything? Really?
To rectify any situation for yourself, your friends, family and neighbors no voting is needed. This is all just common sense really.
Tell me about it. What is needed?
Don’t participate in the farce that is this system. Voting enables them to continue. If no one shows up to vote then who can they blame? Political parties are a joke, they are one in the same. It’s all money and the person you see in the public seat there doesn’t make a single decision they just rubber stamp it and put on a good show, because ‘democracy’. No thanks.
"If no one shows up to vote then who can they blame?"
I can't see that happening. In fact I'd go as far as to say it's never going to happen.
So do you have any more practical suggestions.
Doing the same thing every two or four years and expecting a different result is insanity really. People taking care of each other and respecting each other's rights is all that is needed. Not electing some special being to get between us and telling us what we can and cannot do. A slave asking for permission won't work. Now you taking actions to better your situation that might work. Better than hoping for some one you voted for to do it for you.
Now, I'm not telling you what you should be doing, I just know what I'm doing, and it's not voting for someone to save us.
What is needed is people taking responsibility for their own actions.
"Now you taking actions to better your situation that might work."
Sure.. I do that all the time and would do it no matter who was in power.
But that's getting away from the point. There can be a difference depending on who gets into power e.g. If Hilary had won the last election the US would be in a much worse state than it is now. With the trade agreements, Climate change hoax, Massive unemployment, massive immigration etc. etc.
The system is rigged to make you believe you have a say. You don't have any say. You get to choose between theft method 1 or theft method 2. Instead of figuring out who might help me more than the other, I'm trying to figure out how to stop supporting them and ignoring them altogether. Not easy, but the odds of getting results are a lot better than just voting and hoping for the best.
You might find this interesting
https://steemit.com/news/@amd64/anarchists-who-don-t-vote-what-s-the-end-game
I did view the video, great video. I commented on your post. I am also following. Thanks for thew dialog.
Well that's ok if you don't vote but unless you can convince millions of people to do the same, I can't see that it would make any difference.
If the system could be changed to Direct Democracy and/or campaign financing could be tightly restricted and the lobby could be gotten rid of, that could make a difference but I can't see any of those things happening.
But just a smaller number of people voting is unlikely to change anything, unless it was millions less.
Sorry to be so ...well..pessimistic ...I suppose you could say.
I don't need to "convince millions of people" to make a difference on my freedom. Not going to vote for a politician to give to me either. I just go and strive for it on my own. The government cannot give freedom it can only take it away. Do law give you freedom? Does the military beating people p in the middle east give you freedom? If you try to ignore their stupid gameswt, freedom slowly trickles in. Heck, even the constitution does not give you freedom, it only describes it and tries to keep the government hands off of them.
larkenrose
You might appreciate this video :
Anarchists who don't vote! What's the end game?
https://www.bitchute.com/video/GRU8EfavJgo/
I've linked it to: https://steemit.com/news/@amd64/anarchists-who-don-t-vote-what-s-the-end-game
Where you can comment or reply to me within Steemit if you wish.
There are nations that have been around for countless centuries that have rules but no rulers. They make decisions by voting, but rather than having a 51% majority, everyone needs to agree. There's no doubt that they exist, if you look they are still in the same spot they have been for approximately 1000 years.
Where are these nations? Do they have names and locations?
yeah, one example is the 6 nations of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iroquois . The Onondaga Nation is located outside Syracuse, NY
The Onondaga Nation is a sovereign nation of people with its own government. This government has been in existence for countless centuries.
Like other member-nations of the Haudenosaunee, the Onondaga Nation survives today as a sovereign, independent nation, living on a portion of its ancestral territory and maintaining its own distinct laws, language, customs, and culture.
Today, the Onondaga Nation consists of a 7,300-acre territory just south of Syracuse, on which it maintains its sovereignty and operates outside the general jurisdiction of New York State. The Nation is still governed by a Council of Chiefs, selected in accordance with its time-honored democratic system. In the same vein, many Onondagas practice traditional ceremonies and adhere to religious philosophies and social customs that long predate contact with Western civilizations. Aspects of this ideology have been incorporated into America’s legal system, as well as into its culture. Personal and societal consideration of the Seventh Generation is but one example of a Haudenosaunee world view that has informed, enhanced and enlightened American and other national cultures.
As an independent, sovereign government, the Onondaga Nation government does not pay income, sales, or excise taxes to New York State or to the federal government, nor does it receive any of the benefits paid for by these taxes.
Unlike several other New York native nations, the Onondaga Nation has chosen not to become involved in the casino business or other gambling ventures; instead, the Nation operates a tax-free smoke shop, which funds many community projects, including Onondaga language classes, a fire department, a Nation water system, a healing center, a waster transfer station, and a multi-purpose arena.
https://www.onondaganation.org/government/ .
The Onondaga Nation and the Haudenosaunee have never accepted the authority of the United States to make Six Nations citizens become citizens of the United States, as claimed in the Citizenship Act of 1924. We hold three treaties with the United States: the 1784 Treaty of Fort Stanwix, the 1789 Treaty of Fort Harmor and the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua. These treaties clearly recognize the Haudenosaunee as separate and sovereign Nations. https://www.onondaganation.org/news/2018/the-citizenship-act-of-1924/
Although physically situated within the territorial limits of the United States today, native nations like the Onondaga Nation and the other members of the Haudenosaunee, or Six Nations Confederacy, retain their status as sovereign nations. Like the United States, the Haudenosaunee is a union of sovereign nations joined together for the common benefit of its citizens. Governed by a Grand Council of Chiefs who deliberate and make decisions for the people concerning issues both domestic and international, the Haudenosaunee began as a confederacy of sovereign nations aligned to deal with other native nations surrounding their lands and, later, to negotiate with Europeans when the latter came into their territories beginning in the early 1600’s. https://www.onondaganation.org/government/sovereignty/
If you want to know how the leaders are chosen, start this @17:00
Thanks for the info, it's very interesting.
However they seem to be a democracy and they have leaders.
Leaders, managers, governors, are just differen't names for the same things.
Collectively, Leadership. management or governance.
So they have Government, though maybe somewhat different to, and much smaller than the USA, is (as portrayed in the video), fundamentally and ideologically very similar to that of the original USA.
there's a reason that their government is fundamentally and ideologically very similar to that of the original USA. The founders of the US used them a model for the new government they want to create. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/217630.Exiled_in_the_Land_of_the_Free
Leadership. management and governance are all used in the corporate model, without democracy, by either consensus or majority. Are you arguing that leadership. management and governance should be rejected? Or that for them to be legitimate that they must have consent? Or something else?
"There are nations that have been around for countless centuries that have rules but no rulers. They make decisions by voting, but rather than having a 51% majority, everyone needs to agree."
So what happens when you can't get everyone to agree? Getting everyone to agree on anything anywhere, any time is a tall order, if not impossible.
"The Nation is still governed by a Council of Chiefs, selected in accordance with its time-honored democratic system"
What's the difference between a "democratic system"
and a democracy?
"Are you arguing that leadership. management and governance should be rejected?"
No, quite the opposite.
"Or that for them to be legitimate that they must have consent? "
Yes I would argue that consent is needed for legitimacy.
Essentially I'm arguing against the theme of this main post (That we should not vote in US elections), and that will somehow improve our system or situation.
As I said in earlier replies, unless you can convince millions to do the same, then your 'not voting' is unlikely to make any difference.
You then informed me that "There are nations that have been around for countless centuries that have rules but no rulers."
It then turned out that they do have rulers. They call them Chiefs who are selected in accordance with its time-honored democratic system.
What's the difference between being selected and elected?
We complain about our leaders being selected rather than elected.
So all I'm saying is that unless and until we can somehow get rid of the corruption in the Government(not sure how we can do that) we're better off voting for the lesser of two evils rather than not voting, since that way we're more likely to get the worst of two evils.
"So what happens when you can't get everyone to agree? Getting everyone to agree on anything anywhere, any time is a tall order, if not impossible."
It's funny that you would say that something is impossible when people are doing it
"You then informed me that "There are nations that have been around for countless centuries that have rules but no rulers."
It then turned out that they do have rulers. They call them Chiefs who are selected in accordance with its time-honored democratic system.
What's the difference between being selected and elected?
We complain about our leaders being selected rather than elected."
You watched Oren Lyons tell you how chiefs are selected by consensus.
"So all I'm saying is that unless and until we can somehow get rid of the corruption in the Government(not sure how we can do that) we're better off voting for the lesser of two evils rather than not voting, since that way we're more likely to get the worst of two evils."
I can think of 100's of things that would get rid of corruption and voting for someone who is in favor of corruption isn't one of them.