To Vote or Not to Vote?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Voting seems to many an exercise in futility as well as something worse, perhaps. Does your vote matter? And – more fundamentally – is it wrong to vote at all if all you want is for your rights as well as the rights of other people to be respected?

The brilliantly funny and also just brilliant comic-philosopher George Carlin argued that voting is not only futile, it perpetuates the fiction that you have a choice and – worse –  that the things done to you and to others are hey-presto! legitimized because you and others voted for them, creating a feedback loop that makes it improbable if not impossible that anyone’s rights will ever be respected.

This will sound strange, perhaps, but I agree with Carlin  . . . and I vote.

I’ll try to explain.

I would prefer to never have to vote. The italics being important. To never have to attempt to protect my rights and defend my property in this manner. I certainly would never vote for abusing the rights or taking the property of anyone else.

I wish voting, itself, were regarded by most people as a fundamentally dishonest and cowardly thing (i.e., anonymously voting to have other people take other people’s things for your benefit, etc.) and that rights and property – the same things, really – were never up for a vote.

And yet, they are.

It is not unlike finding yourself wrongly arrested, your assets seized and you taken off to a prison. Your rights and property have been violated. What do you do now? You are under the power of your jailers. That you do not consent is immaterial to this condition. The jailers are not going to just let you go because you insist your rights have been violated, no matter how true that may be.

But you can perhaps get a better work detail. A cell less awful. If given the chance to pick a guard who is a bit less cruel than the guard you have now, would you refuse to pick the lesser of two evils?

And if you did choose it, would that make you complicit in the evil done you – and others?

Carlin appears to take the position that it does make you complicit – as well as a fool. “You voted them in; you have no right to complain,” he says in his famous rant on the subject. But is this so? How is it foolish to attempt to reduce one’s suffering when that is possible, to whatever degree? Carlin asserts implicitly at least that it is not possible to achieve any good by voting – i.e., to reduce one’s suffering – but this is demonstrably false. Examples abound but one will suffice:

On the ballot is a measure that will result in the hateful tax applied to the possession of property being reduced – or at least, not raised. You vote yes, in order to lessen the amount of money forcibly extracted from you and – along with others who vote yes – the measure passes and, while you still are compelled to pay, you pay a bit less and so are a bit less abused Or you vote for a politician who promises to reduce your taxes. Whether he actually does reduce them is not the point. If he then acts to raise taxes is not what you voted for and the responsibility for this evil act is the politician’s, not the person who voted for him. 

Of course you don’t want to be in “prison” at all; you would much prefer to pay no taxes whatever on what it is supposedly your property (since you paid for it) and your income (since you earned it) and which therefore you quite rightly consider to be your property and your income entirely.

You never concede legitimacy to the taking of any of it – from anyone – certainly not by casting a vote to prevent the taking of some of it.

Because that’s what’s on the ballot.

How is this materially – or morally – different from the “vote” of the person wrongly imprisoned to better his conditions?

The prisoner is constantly conjuring strategies to obtain his freedom and clear his name. He never stops working toward that end. But at the same time, he does what he can within the constraints imposed upon him and within the bounds of morality – i.e., without violating the rights of others – to improve his situation, even if that only means limiting the harm done to him as opposed to ending the harm done to him.

I see no contradiction. One strives toward the ideal while accepting steps in that direction. One doesn’t make much progress toward the ideal by taking no steps at all.

The fact – like it or not – is that our rights and property are up for a vote.

We can vote against violating our rights and the taking of our property while also vociferously arguing that no one rights or property should be up for a vote at all. Indeed, the vote gives us the opportunity – within the context of the fact that the vote is going to occur, whether we like it or not – to make our case about the immorality of cowardly (because anonymously) voting to violate the rights of others and to have other people take people’s possessions and abuse their rights on our behalf.

To note vote at all – out of principled opposition to the idea that anyone’s rights and property should be up for a vote – amounts to the same thing, within the context of the fact that the vote is going to occur, like it or not – as voting to violate the rights and property of others as well as one’s own rights and property.

And that is to be complicit in it.

It’s worth mentioning, in closing, that Carlin’s fundamental objection wasn’t that other people’s rights and property are subject to the vote. He was an astute – and brilliantly funny – man. But he was also a man who believed in “helping” other people . . . to other people’s stuff, via the vote.

His main complaint was that the voting didn’t “help” those he deemed deserving but rather that the vote profits those he regarded as undeserving; i.e., that it is fixed in favor of high-powered/big-money interests who have their thumbs are on the scales.

And he was right about that.

But that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to vote to keep everyone’s hands out of your pockets and all of their noses out of your business – even if only a bit less.

At least until enough people can be persuaded that it’s obscene to vote to take anyone’s money or meddle in their business at all.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at [email protected] and I will send you a copy directly!

Share Button


  1. Eric, this is a little off-topic, but I suppose this is as good a place as any. I had a little back-and-forth with a couple of other commenters about self-sufficiency and the division of labor, until the thread petered out and would allow no more replies. Perhaps this would be worth a separate article sometime. Then again, maybe Nunzio is just pushing my buttons.
    I know this isn’t, but of all people, libertarians who like cars should understand this. Preparing to be self-sufficient is fine. My wife and I have a garden, and a freezer full of beef and pork that we bought from neighbors. But I know for sure that without the voluntary – and now international – division of labor, we would be much worse off. We cannot build our own cars. It would take years to make a toaster that would blow up in my face the first time I plugged it in.
    Why would anybody think the division of labor is a bad thing, or a tool of large corporations that want to feed you poison? It is anything but. It is what happens when people are free to trade and associate as they see fit. It’s what makes it possible for you to test-drive cars all day – and then stop at the store on the way home for the things you need.

    • Roland, please don’t make the mistake of thinking in “absolutes”, i.e., like a SITH LORD, LoL.

      Even most “preppers” discuss the need to set up a system of barter of goods and/or services with fellow preppers, so obviously this hallowed “division of labor” is a behavioral pattern, borne of both expediency and necessity. When I refer to self-sufficiency, like “S-A-A-A-A-A-F-T-E-E-E-E”, it’s as much a mindset and depends largely upon POV.

      The trouble with our modern, inter-connected, technologically sophisticated culture is that most of us live in a manner where we’ve got at most a week or so of foodstuffs and other household essentials (like TP, which, during the initial panic a year ago over the “Rona”, suddenly was hard to get). So likewise most Americans fail to save anything, living at or beyond their means, ASSuming that the funds will keep rolling in AND their will be things to purchase, freely on demand, with said cash flow. This is a state of affairs which is historically UNprecented, i.e., throughout most history there has been frequent economic hard times and/or famines, and war, and pestilence, which, according to one Archibald Bunker, of 704 Hauser St, Queens, NY (dere), “Gawd, in His infinoot moicy, gave us, dere…” (when giving “Meathead” a response as to the then contemporary issue of overpopulation).

      When I refer to gardening and other means of subsistence agriculture, it’s a matter of making good use of arable real estate, physical prowess, and cultivational skills to produce for one’s own self and family. There was a time when even in most American towns and/or the emerging suburbia, a desirable thing to have on one’s property were fruit trees, and folks commonly kept chickens and/or a pig. Homemakers were familiar with the art of canning with Mason Jars. These skills are largely lost, and for WHAT? So folks can laze about on the couch, watching “entertainment” which contributes to their bad attitudes and sloth? Folks, this whole thing with a year’s worth of the “Plandemic Panic” has been a huge WAKE UP CALL…to show how delicate and intricate is our “division of labor”, and how easily it can fail…so why REMAIN vulnerable?

      • Hi Douglas,
        I am not arguing against being prepared or having survival skills, and I am not arguing in favor of being vulnerable or a lazy Facebook/Twitter addict. I am arguing that our immensely complex division of labor is what has given us the fabulous standard of living that most of us take for granted, and we should recognize it for the blessing that it is. It is a miracle – yes, absolutely.

  2. Carlin’s comedy was the best because good comedy imitates life.

    Like it, lump it, his most prescient comments included truths like “This is the beast we can do” and “Fuck hope”.

    Voting is like spitting in the wind and gets you the same.

    What a farce. Imagine “choosing” your masters.

    Doesn’t matter if it’s the Orange Big Mouth or the Corpse.

    When I vote, I write myself or Mickey Mouse in.

    We both have the same chance of making things better.

    Mickey more than me.

    • Even Mickey has his limits, as he found out in his attorney’s office…

      “Mr. Mouse, I’ve had the best private investigators and doctors go over Minnie’s medical records, and I just don’t see a way to convince the judge that she’s insane so you can be granted a divorce…”

      “Insane? I didn’t say she was insane! I said, ‘she’s fucking Goofy!’ “

      • I have more than once now heard, from people who remember it, “Maybe the wrong side won the war”.

        I am not sure, but they may be right.

        One thing you can be sure of, anyone under 50 likely knows nothing about the war, except that the ‘right’ side won. Blank stares when you mention “the victor writes the history books”.

        • That’s what Patton rued, once the war was over, saying that “We” (the UK, USA, France, and their Soviet “Ally”) had destroyed the last great people of Europe, the Germans…and in six months, he was dead and gone, under questionable circumstances.

          • We can’t know what would have happened with certainty, but I suspect we would probably have moon bases and planetary exploration far in advance of anything we have done so far.

            Looking at how a majority of the worlds population lives, and the damage the US-UK and its minions have done, one can reasonably pose the question, “would things be better than they are 75 years on if the Germans had won?”

            • Human nature being rather universal regardless of time or place (Varying for the better only among individuals who or smaller cultural groups who consciously seek to overcome evil), I say no matter who won/wins, when it comes to those who lust for power and greed, and who operate collectively, the only real difference comes down to which group gets to split the spoils, and what language they speak.

              And much of what we imagine to be the superiority of other groups, is really just our susceptibility to believe their proppaganda.

              Let us remember for instance, that the Brits had radar before the Krauts……

              • I grew up in a majority German/minority English immigrant part of Canada. My grandfather(Eng) and my best friends father(Ger) likely shot at each other in Tunisia.

                The common stereotypes of both were part of my daily life. The Germans seemed quite superior in their education, diligence, hygiene, appearance, reasoning, pride of place……

                Could be that a better class of Germans immigrated or a lower class of English. But at least in my experience, the Germans seemed like people to aspire to be like. The English, not so much.

                But yes Nunz, the scum tends to float to the top in all places.

            • Hi Anon,

              As you probably already know, Phillip Dick addressed this in his novel, Man in the High Castle, which centered on the Axis having won the war and the Germans and Japanese jointly occupying the former U.S. It is set in the 1960s and supersonic/rocket travel is routine, with Martian colonization in the works.

              Given how far ahead, technically, the Germans were in 1945 – for example, the fact of the V2 and the Silbervogel that was being developed – this is plausible.

              • Yes, had seen a few of the Amazon show too. Was not that impressed with it.

                About tech. I kind of agree with Nunz that the English were ahead in some areas (jet engines, squandered and cryptography), but the Germans were ahead in others like rocketry and guidance. They even had a rudimentary cruise missile. There was a reason for Paperclip.

                The Germans seem to have (had) a more cohesive cultural identity and nationalism. The English could do it when required (war) but generally were not as cohesive in peace because of a defacto caste system that kept one (or more) class hating another that continually screwed them. The Germans were generally screwed by outsiders more than their own.

          • Perhaps if the Last Great People of Europe had not embarked on an mission to aggressively invade and take over their neighbors they would have fared better.

            Of course there are those who believe that Poland and Czechoslovakia invaded the Fatherland.

            • “We were invited! Check with Poland!”

              Of course, considering that came from Seth MacFarlane and his “Family Guy” cartoon….

      • Hey, back in ’96, not content with the choice of Kang (Bob Dole) vs. Kodos (Bill Clinton) I voted for “Serak the Preparer” (Harry Browne), and though smug in my self-satisfied sense of being a “pure” Libertarian”, got absolutely “nuthin” to show for it, save this little gem from “The Simpsons”, which I swear is STILL applicable and will be again in 2024…

        • Harry Browne was apparently the last of the *real* Libertarians to be associate with the Libertarian Party….even I would have voted for him. It’s been all downhill for the LP ever since….whom now seem to exist to fullfill Kang’s (Or was it Kodos’s?) “Go ahead, THROW away your vote!”- by offering up laughing-stocks like Gary Johnson and Jo Jorgensen.

          And now we have that other guy… “Mumbly Joe” in the WH (Only not the Mumbly Joe Homer was referring to- Though I don’t know which would be worse!)

          • It was Kang (voiced by Harry Sherear). IDK that I’d consider Gary Johnson a “laughingstock” as he got far more votes than Browne could every dream of, though in what COUNTS,(Electoral College), both came away empty-handed.

            “Mumbly Joe” was then just a non-descript person as Homer struggles to figure out who’s running against Clinton, but uncannily PRESICENT…FWIW, the Simpsons predicted that Trump would run for POTUS, though that wasn’t too much of a stretch of the imagination as in 2000, he did form an “exploratory committee”, though he decided (or maybe was “talked to”) to instead support GWB’s candidacy.

            • Aww, Johnson was a laughing-stock because he wasn’t by any means a Libertarian- which I guess is why he was more popular than a real Libertarian would ever be with the general public. He was just goofy- some of the things he’d advocate were neither Libertarian nor sensible. He gave Libertarianism a bad name, ’cause people who didn’t know much about Libertarianism would hear him and think that what he said is what we stand for.
              Hey, nothing beats the Simpsons predicting Trump’s presidency -by what, nearly two decades?- in the Bart To The Future!

              Marge: “Remember, in England they call a line a queue, an elevator a lift, and botulism steak and kidney pie”!

    • Carlin: “I like to mess with people. When someone asks me what time it is, I say ‘Either six-fifteen or Mickey has a hard-on’.”

  3. I dunno if I will vote again. I don’t trust the system now to be fair.

    I used to vote in the primaries to try to have some “say” on the Republicans my area would vote for in the general election but wouldn’t show up for in the primaries. Then in the general election, I’d generally vote Libertarian or not for anyone at all if there isn’t a L to vote for.

    It is always sad to see the low turnout for Libertarians as it shows the mentality of “lesser evil” on full display. Hey folks that voted for “lesser evil”, are you enjoying your evil now? More? Sure, just don’t ask for too much at first, get the “lesser” version, it may sting less, but you will get full evil in the end. Which prompts the questions, “why bother with lesser evil? Why not just get it over with and go full retard with greater evil?”

  4. I don’t consent, therefore I do not vote. No matter who is elected by propagandized indoctrinated masses around us, they are going to do much evil; at least they won’t be doing it in my name, because I refuse to consent to any of it by casting a ballot that says I am in favor of “X” because he is 0.000001% less evil than Y- and in reality, we do not even know if he is that, because they all say whatever they need to in order to woo the crowd to whom they’re trying to appease, and there is absolutely NOTHING holding them to any promise they make while campaigning.
    The only thing that is certain, is that whomever you vote for will perpetuate government, and by voting, you are consenting to that. And whether your candidate wins or loses, by voting you are agreeing that the political process is legit, as you are participating in it for the express purpose of determining who will rule you and your neighbors.

    • Hey Nunz,

      While I agree that voting is ultimately counter productive to the advance of liberty, it is not, in itself, a grant of consent. It is, intrinsically, neither immoral, nor an act of aggression. It is a waste of time, incapable of limiting the power of government and creates the perception of legitimacy in the minds of many. But, the “you shouldn’t vote because it’s immoral” argument made by some libertarians is just as wrong as the “you must vote because it’s your civic duty” argument made by Statists.


      • Hi Jeremy!
        I do agree with you. While voting can be immoral, such as when doing so for the purpose of voting oneself or one’s cause largess or coercive power, it is inherently not evil of itself, -especially when done with the intent of trying to minimize evil/tyranny/largess/etc.- It is, as you said, just a waste of time, and even in so far as consent and legitimacy go, in a scenario where many other people participate, our voting or not voting has absolutely no bearing on those things, other than in our own minds.
        I know I do feel good though, knowing that I have not participated in any of what they do, even if that participation had only been signatory.

      • Jeremy-

        You sum it up nicely. I’ve refrained from weighing in on this because, with respect to “voting”, context matters. Like others have mentioned, size matters. Skin in the outcome matters. For instance, as a board member in a boardroom you will feel like your vote “counts.” Local elections can be important. Issue voting.

        Mises might say human action is “voting” a la “voting with your dollars” or your chosen jurisdiction. We’re voting all the time to greater and lesser effect. Like minarchism vs. anarcho- caplitalism, though, things tend to devolve into certainties because they are abstract. “I believe” kinda stuff. All that being said, I had promised to no longer vote in 2012, backslid with OF and the 2020 elections due to the extreme duress of the scamdemic, but have resolved to vote no more due to the process appearing to me (and others) to be illegitimate as opposed to for purely philosophical reasons.

        • That’s all right; we all backslide sometimes. I stopped voting after 2004, because Chimp was a joke. I only voted for The Chimp because he was the lesser of two evils; later I learned that both he and Mr. Potato Head were BOTH former Skull & Bones! IOW, they were both on the same team.

          I didn’t vote in the 2008 or 2012 elections. Or should I say selections? 2012 certainly was a selection. Even if BHO had lost (a distinct possibility, given the weak economy of the time), Mittens wouldn’t have been any different; he was BHO with lighter pigmentation. We still would’ve had Obamacare, since Mittens’ Romneycare in MA was the template for O’Care; BHO’s people met with Mittens’ people to learn about how to do it! TPTB were going to give us O’Care whether we wanted it or not; hence, we were given the “choice” between BHO and Mittens.

          When 2016 came along, I was somewhat pleased. Not only did the GOP have a good field of candidates; they had Scott Walker, former WI governor. He’d brought fiscal responsibility to Madison, so I thought he’d be good. He didn’t gain traction, and he soon dropped out of the race.

          Then Trumpy Bear came along, and I was excited! Here was someone talking about the issues that concerned me, and he was talking about them in a sensible way. I registered GOP to vote in the primaries, so I could do my small part to help him get the nomination. He did, and I voted i the general. If not for the death of my cat on 11/9/16 (20+ years old PTS for kidney disease), I’d have been really happy for the first time since 1980, when Reagan won.

          Though I was disillusioned with OM, I voted for him again last November because I thought anything is better than Creepy Joe; Creepy Joe doesn’t know who he is most days! That, and I didn’t want Kamala Harris getting in; anyone with a brain knew that a vote for Biden was really a vote for Heels Up Harris. After the EPIC fraud, mostly brought on by Trump himself, I’m done. This woman’s rant pretty well sums up my thoughts and feelings:

          Other than that, I changed my registration from GOP (fourth generation, mind you) to Independent.

  5. The truly tragic thing about voting and elections is that they are largely decided by the completely ignorant. The party faithful of each are nearly the same size as the other, leaving the election to those who haven’t given it much thought, nor have any desire to.

  6. In the likely event that no one good will be allowed to run in 2024, I plan to vote for myself. All up and down the ballot.

    I can think of no one more eminently qualified to run my life.

  7. Every number is divisible by 1. The closer the total number of voters is to 1, the better your chances of winning. If someone who lives alone votes to have pizza for dinner then they get pizza for dinner. A member of a family of five has at least a 20% chance.

    The more local the election, the better the chance your vote makes a difference. Don’t be a sore head cop-out because you have zero impact on national elections. City council members and county commissioners have a big impact on your life and your voice is a lot louder in those elections.

    • That’s how it’s SUPPOSED to be; most government is supposed to occur at the LOCAL level, then the state. The “Founding Fookers” would likely be aghast at the size of the Federal Government and the degree of involvement in the lives of Americans. It’s gone way beyond what even the most ardent “Federalist” like Hamilton ever dreamed of. It might take something like what author Whitley Strieber envisioned in his 1984 nuclear apocalyptic novel, “Warday”, where the upside was the de facto elimination of the Federal Government, thanks in no small part to Washington being utterly nuked to oblivion, and the breakup of the USA into several de facto countries, with a fate similar to our real time line befalling the erstwhile Soviet Union.

  8. You can’t eradicate cannibalism by eating the cannibals; there is no better analog for what voting is.
    The voting booth should reconfigure the ballot lever to a dildo and require the Helots to use their mouths to make the selection of their next master, it also provides a keen preview of things to come for the voter.
    “A ballot is just a substitute for a bullet. If your vote isn’t backed by a bullet, it is meaningless. Without the bullet, people could ignore the election outcome. Voting would be pointless. Democracy has violence at its very core!” ~Muir Matteson, “The Nonviolent Zone”
    “Free election of masters does not abolish the masters or the slaves.” Herbert Marcuse
    “Working within the system means to become a part of the system. When you go into the voting booth, the only meaningful significance that your action will have is to show that one more person supports the state”. ~Mark Davis
    “Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other.” ~ Oscar Ameringer
    “An election is a moral horror, as bad as a battle except for blood; a mud bath for every soul concerned in it.” ~ George Bernard Shaw
    “If the right to vote were expanded to seven year olds … its policies would most definitely reflect the ‘legitimate concerns’ of children to have ‘adequate’ and ‘equal’ access to ‘free’ french fries, lemonade and videos.” ~ Hans-Hermann Hoppe
    “Grown men do not need leaders.” – Edward Abbey

    • All government, whether democratic or otherwise, whether a vote is part of the process or not, is founded on the principal that government has sole authority to kill you if you don’t comply. Which is exactly what it will do if you flatly refuse to comply. “Grown men do not need leaders” is exactly right. If you can’t reach agreement for common cause with your neighbor, that doesn’t mean you need to kill them or call somebody in a costume to do so. Just go on about other business. Find an agreeable neighbor. The one and only purpose of government is to facilitate theft, by armed robbery known as taxes, and by less obvious means such as political favors.
      Is there any more hard sold sporting event than an election? Quite similar emotions are promoted. Your “team” is all that matters. If it doesn’t win its the end of the world. Guess what? If your team does win it could also be the end of the world. After all, some of the least sane among the general population have nuclear weapons at their finger tips, and the most expensive military in the history of the world at their command. All it takes is one psychotic whim.
      I would never quote George Bernard Shaw, in public anyway. He was a self avowed racist eugenicist. That doesn’t disqualify him from having legitimate argument or ideas, but it does require extensive scrutiny of his motive. In this case, was he arguing for elimination of a vote because it frustrated his less than moral intentions? Was he arguing for an elitist self appointed government of which he would be a member? He also argued vehemently for the forced euthanizing of those who couldn’t serve society to his satisfaction.

      • “I would never quote George Bernard Shaw, in public anyway.”

        I regularly do. And it is always the same reaction, the ad hominem. It has to be because whatever his other failings, the quotes stand on their own.

        True words are true, no matter how much of an asshole the speaker may or may not be.

        • Anyone who had libtard-skewering arguments gets dismissed as being “Raciss and Shee-itt” anyway.

          George Bernard Shaw was exactly right about the Americans and the Brits being two people DIVIDED by a “Common” language.

          Next thing Rudyard Kipling or Winston Churchill are on the chopping block simply b/c many of the things they said wouldn’t fly these days. More a testament to how far we’ve fallen.

      • Why are most White libertarians so quick to assume there is something inherently unethical or immoral about endeavoring to improve the genetic quality of one’s progeny or, more broadly, to improve the biological fitness of one’s tribe, clan, ethnicity, or race? No other race I’m aware of operates under such a notion. Acting to maximimize the prospects of survival and propsperity for one’s kinfolk does not mean that one seeks to harm other peoples.

        • Indeed. The only domesticated species we let randomly and recklessly procreate is our own.

          I don’t think that is specifically wrong, but is does seem to be dooming our species to inevitable decline to Idiocracy.

          • Hi Anon,

            The problem in re “The only domesticated species we let randomly and recklessly procreate is our own” is that the responsible, who should procreate, are actively discouraged from procreating while the irresponsible are rewarded for it.

            • I agree. The low IQ single mother lottery win. Crap out a few ‘government check tokens’ and let Big Daddy Government (we all get to have baby mommas without the fun) pay for everything.

              Personally, I think it is that the responsible are smart enough to know that having children in a defacto Company Town is not a good idea. Children just add another slave chain as the state has many more ways screw with you via the offspring.

        • Not I, Mack –

          But I think it’s smart policy generally. A man (or woman) of any race is well-advised to seek out a mate who is at least as intelligent as he or she is and as “fit” and “healthy” for the sake of the children they might produce. Any man or woman who mates with someone below par is probably below par themselves.

  9. That’s probably one of your best articles I’ve ever read. That clears up so much of my confusion about this topic, morality-wise and whatnot.

  10. Politician: One most adept getting the most people to believe the most preposterous lies the most often. Almost always a sociopath, if not a psychopath.
    There is possibly a majority of people who would agree with this definition, and yet turn right around and believe one of them, and vote for them.
    Fraud is the cancer that voting was a victim of from the moment of its inception. I suggest there has never been an open honest election, anywhere. The fundamental argument against voting is that it’s totally ineffective. In what way has our trajectory changed in the last 70 years or so? Whether D’s or R’s hold the reigns, there has been no significant change since the election of FDR. JFK had thoughts of political change, but such was promptly “corrected”. For some time, we have been offered a choice between two candidates from the same party that pretends to be two parties. Trump was an aberration who’s usefulness ended the moment he was elected, and after four years that usefulness has been erased as well. We’re right back where we were four years and one day ago, if not far worse. I do vote on issues, which are almost always local to State level, over which some control is possible, since referendums do not require the approval of politicians. Referendums are illegal in national elections. I do not vote for adept liars, local or otherwise. Gang rape is democracy in action. Voting with the victim solves nothing, except perhaps getting you booted out of the gang. Fortunately, shooting the gang member doing all the talking to prevent gang rape is acceptable. Too bad it isn’t in the case of political gangs, which are far more dangerous to the population at large than free market gangs. To resurrect George Carlin again, “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it”. I don’t condemn anyone for voting. But decisions are made on behalf of the bank cartel, oligarchs, and the rest of the 0.1%, not on the outcome of election sports.

  11. The problem with the prison analogy is that if it really is a prison, any election that your jailers announce has to be a cruel joke. Only inmates who got off the bus yesterday fall for it.
    In the sewer of politics, any vote that you cast to moderate your enslavement is quickly erased. When a school tax increase fails, they will bring it back again and again until they bamboozle enough suckers into passing it. I’ve seen this over and over and over. Lucy pulls the football away and Charlie Brown falls on his ass. Why should I waste my time on this delusion? What seems like a victory for liberty today will be trampled into the dirt by the mob tomorrow.
    The last time I voted was for Ron Paul in 2008. I worked on his campaign again in 2012, but his name did not even make it onto the ballot here. On election days, I make a conscious effort to be extra-productive while the gullible line up for the state’s holy sacrament. Screw them. Setting foot in a government polling place is as repulsive to my senses as putting on the diaper. Ewww!

    • Hi Roland,

      I don’t disagree – but what is the alternative? Just accept that it is going to happen and do nothing to even try to ameliorate it? In which case, those who do vote will determine what happens. And without the moderating influence of others who vote contrarily, the ones who do vote – which would be the most authoritarian-minded people – will do to the rest of us entirely as they like.

      I get that the trend in general is not good. But it also true that voting can – has – at least slowed down the tyranny in some case and that is something rather than nothing. And as much as it sucks toad dick, that’s the choice we face.

      • Morning Eric,
        Yeah, I am sympathetic to the defensive-voting argument. For a while my practice was to ignore candidates on the ballot but still show up to mark “No” on any tax increase or regulatory infringement. But as I wrote before, when a bad idea fails, you can bet that it will be back again and again until the unwashed decide correctly.
        I believe the answer to “What is the alternative?” is to persuade people that the way to peace and prosperity is you pick what you want and I pick what I want and we pay for it ourselves.
        Imagine if they held an election and only one percent bothered to show up. Conservatives will shriek that this would hand over immense power to politicians, but that is nonsense. With no popular support for their scam, they would be neutered. They would be cowering in their offices wondering what we were up to. They could bark orders all they wanted and productive people would just laugh hysterically for a minute, grateful for the entertainment, and then get back to work.

        • I agree, Roland – in re “I believe the answer to “What is the alternative?” is to persuade people that the way to peace and prosperity is you pick what you want and I pick what I want and we pay for it ourselves.”

          And while striving toward that end, a defensive vote isn’t an affront directed at that end!

        • It’s a pleasant fantasy, but nobody votes for warlords or dictators, and they are far from impotent at enforcing their edicts.

          • So we vote. And get warlords and dictators anyway. Very few such gain power without a vote among an armed population. So the Democrats are pushing hard to disarm us, after barricading their castle.
            The point being, they often gain power with a vote in the face of a well armed population. Winning an election “justifies” them.

            • Mussolini and his Fascists’ staged one of history’s greatest bluffs by their October 1922 “March on Rome”, the Italian King feared Civil War even though the Fascists had failed to achieve a majority in prior elections. King Victor Emmanuelle III, whose father had advised him that all that was necessary for a king to “rule” was to sign documents, read the newspaper, and mount a horse, was inclined to go along with Mussolini once he was convinced that the Fascists weren’t going to subvert the monarchy nor threaten Italian businesses and institutions. The King then ASKED Mussolini to form a government.

              It was much the same about ten years and change later in Germany. The Nazis had actually peaked in terms of their popular support, and still couldn’t ally with other German parties in order to form a government. Ongoing unrest in the streets of many German cities, mostly fomented by the Communists but often exacerbated by Nazi reprisals, brought about an invitation to Hitler to form a government, with the justification, “We” (the Christian and Social Democrats) are “hiring” him to fend off the KPD (German Communist Party). We all know how THAT turned out…

  12. How does one vote for six of one while trying to counter half a dozen of another, even if elections would ever somehow be honest again?

    They all lie. The [not very]conservative pledges to do ABC, but gets elected and does KLM. The librul promises to do XYZ and gets elected and does KLM- thus it makes not one iota of difference who you vote for; and it’s for sure that whoever wins will increase the size and scope of government, and decrease liberty, because that is the goal of any authoritarian political system, and your vote is merely to give your assent/consent, and to supposedly choose whether it’s the red or blue scumbag that gets used when they ream ya.

    Has voting ever accomplished anything positive before? Why does anyone assume that suddenly it will do so “next time”?

    Voting in America today would be like voting at a football game on the question of whether the game should continue after halftime, or if they should instead present a lecture by Murray Rothbard. Even if all else is even and legit…you know that the football will win, and to think that you’re raising your hand for Rothbard is going to accomplish anything, is just to engage in self-deception.

    Is it wrong to vote? When no candidate truly supports even the most basic pretenses of liberty, but merely proposes a brand of tyranny which seems slightly more tolerable than his opponent- yet still advances overall tyranny, I think at best, it is self-harm.

    Remember folks….the COVID BS and it’s medical martial law STARTED under the admin of the “lesser evil”….and things which are coming, thanks to Senile Joe and Kamal-toe, had their way paved before them by many of the things/appointees which were set in place by The Orange Turd. Many voted for OM thinking it would buy us time; what it really did, was buy the Democrats time, and has made their job that much easier- so though voting Orange may’ve seemed more palatable in ’16, in reality, it accomplished ABSOLUTELY NOTHING- as was the case in every election in modern times. If anything, it helped our enemies, rather than hurting them.

    If we have the sense to avoid participating in the ridiculous rituals of our time, like diapering, and environmental virtue-signaling, why not stay on the high road and avoid participating in one of the most cherished and hallowed deceptions of modern times- voting?

    You may not do any harm by voting…but neither do you do good- you just waste your time, and help legitimize the very thing we oppose the most- government, by giving your consent that you deem it legitimate that certain men should be elevated to a special status and have the power to do in your name what you yourself do not have the power to do, just because some document written 200 years ago by other men says that that is what other men may do when elevated by your vote.
    THAT is as much a religion as is environmentalism, sickness-psychosis, or Buddhism.
    VOTE(n.) “mid-15c., “formal expression of one’s wish or choice with regard to a proposal, candidate, etc.,” from Latin votum “a vow, wish, promise to a god, solemn pledge, dedication,” .

  13. if you don’t vote you’re still in the jail but lying prone with the end up awaiting the treatment. Vote and see 3 digital votes for the other guy. Prez Hiden got the most votes than any other prez ever period but look at his youtube vidoes and rallys. Huge negative count vs positive. Guy can’t even take a question.

    • Mooeing,

      “if you don’t vote you’re still in the jail but lying prone with the end up awaiting the treatment.”

      Where are the chains?

      Until those chains are “resting lightly upon you” I’m not seeing the lack of freedom.

  14. What tiny shred of democracy here was ripped away by the blatant 2020 election steal. Not just for orange idiot but the two communists selected as senators in georgia. The 2016 election was the last honest election in american history we’ll ever see

  15. “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”
    ― Winston S. Churchill

    This I find is quite true. Vote or not, in the end doesn’t matter because the great mass of voters are stupid dolts that can barely tie their shoes.

    I am in favor of a system that only those who pay more in taxes than they receive should vote.
    Since they are paying for the decisions of politicians, it is only moral that they are represented by those politicians.

    Until that happens (it won’t) your vote doesn’t matter.

  16. In the Soviet Union, there were still elections: but there was only one name on the ballot. Voting still mattered however, as the amount of people who turned up at the polls was seen as a barometer of public support for the official in question. Withholding your vote was a method of registering dissent.

  17. I remember that George Carlin bit. I agreed then and agree now.
    “The public sucks and fuck hope.” LOL.
    What a loss his death was to the nation. Does anybody think he would have allowed himself to be “canceled?” I know he leaned liberal in many areas, but he also had a set of cojones and did not suffer fools. He would have given the appropriate two-word response to any whining about his routines, hurt feelings or attempted censorship. I wish he was around so I could see that.

  18. Eric,

    “But that doesn’t mean it’s wrong to vote to keep everyone’s hands out of your pockets and all of their noses out of your business – even if only a bit less.”

    Would you vote for this guy?

    “I will make no promises I cannot fulfill, pledge no spending we cannot afford, offer no posts to cronies you cannot trust, and propose no foreign commitment we should not keep. I will not shrink from opposing any party faction, any special interest group, or any major donor whose demands are contrary to the national interest.”

  19. Eric – wholeheartedly agree that I, too, am not naïve as to whether my vote “counts” or not…we saw this past round that Stalin’s declaration that it’s those that COUNT the votes who “count” being made blatantly manifest. Still, to not vote at all, in “protest”, is to leave the political process to those that design to take what’s YOURS anyway.

    However, what is lacking, at all levels, is the option, where a slate of candidates is proffered, that the option of “NONE OF THE ABOVE” is available. So, if “NOTA” (and, you nit-picking wags, the law would specify that no person could change their name to that term, it’s meaning in plain English being upheld) is the winner, then not only must there be another election but those previously on the slate are disqualified. After all, if I’m on a selection board to fill a position, and none of the candidates seem to qualify, doesn’t that mean, “do it OVER”?

    What else I’d get rid of is the primary election system. Wherein is the duopoly supported or required by the Constitution? Indeed, so many of the ‘Founding Fookers’ were very much, at least in the beginning, against the formation of political parties, although many of them, like Alexander Hamilton, for example, were ardently partisan later on. What this has degraded into the once-Golden State of Cali(porn)ia, is a situation where, with the cross-party primary, you often see TWO Dummycrats going at it in the general election…a choice between “Tweedle Dumb-Shit” versus “Tweedle Dumb-Ass”, much akin to the slate of designated “candidates” in the so-called “elections” that took place in the former Soviet Union. At least, then, most who bothered to vote KNEW it was a farce.

  20. I only vote in local elections, and even that is sometimes pointless as most of the pols have nobody running against them. It does make a difference on raising property taxes beyond the allowable yearly increase of 2-1/2%, sometimes those pass, sometimes not. Of course they get around that by raising the “assessed value” of my house so yeah, gotta keep the serfs in line no matter how they vote.
    Too bad we can’t vote to increase OUR income 😖

    • Mike,

      Speaking of assesed value, I remember a town council meeting when the housing market was going gangbusters in like 2006 where people were complaining about ascessors coming every other year and the town council claiming well we are following state law. Then in 2008 when many housing values had tanked those same assesors were not sent out. The council got an earfull that year and threats of going to lawyers if they didn’t “follow the law” they claimed was necessary when the housing market was rising ridiculously.

  21. Looking at the numbers, the end result of 2020 was brought to you by approximately 13,000 GA Libertarians “voting their conscience” in November, choosing Trump at the top of the ticket but voting for their own party’s candidate against Senator Perdue, resulting in the runoff.

    Voting still matters.

    • No, it’s the fault of all those people who voted for a sleazy RINO dumbass instead of for the libertarian.

      My takeaway is that only 13000 or so of the voters in GA showed any sign of intelligence. As for the nonvoters, well, who knows? Maybe they are even smarter than that.

  22. They were called collaborators.

    Principles? Flexible I guess.

    Better to be at the right hand of the Devil than in his way?

    I guess any man has his price.

    • Anon,

      “I guess any man has his price.”

      How many here started their teens with this?

      “I wanna be a lawyer
      Doctor or professor
      A member of the UMC

      I want an air conditioned
      Cottage on the river
      And all the money I can see

      I wanna drive a Lincoln
      Spend my evenings drinking
      The very best burgandy

      I want a yacht for sailing
      Private eye for tailing
      My wife if She’s a bit too free

      I’ve been told ever since a boy
      that’s what one aught to be
      A part of the UMC

      I want a pool to swim in
      Fancy suits to dress in
      Some stock in GM and GE

      An office in the city
      Secretary pretty
      Takin’ dictation on my knee

      I want a paid vacation
      Don’t want to have to ration
      A thing with anyone but me

      And if there’s war or famine
      Promise I’ll examine
      The details if they’re on TV

      I’ll pretend to be liberal but I’ll still support the GOP,
      As part of the UMC

      I wanna be a lawyer
      Doctor or professor
      A member of the UMC”

  23. Certainly in many jurisdictions, voting is quite worthless. Some races may be worthwhile to provide better conditions for the animals on whatever tax farm they find themselves. I vote to try and keep my hobby preserved: firearm and firearm accessories and shooting. One choice will be slightly anti gun or pro gun, the other will be rabidly anti gun.

  24. A long time ago, I decided it was best if I divorced myself from politics as much as humanly possible. I’ve never voted and will not. I refuse to participate, even if it may seem to benefit me in the short term to do so. Participation lends legitimacy to their illegitimate actions and I will not be a part of that.

    I have resolved to tolerate their intrusions into my life until it becomes intolerable, at which point I will take action to balance the equation as much as one man can, outside of the bounds of their rules.

    Until that day comes, I will speak truth and hurl ridicule at the filthy parasites. But I will not participate in their schemes.

    As for the comparison to the prisoner colluding with his keepers to temporarily lessen his discomfort, I personally find it a breach of morality. I believe one should fight his enemies, not compromise with them. You can’t bargain with a thief. You always lose.

  25. I’ve become disillusioned with the whole voting process. The political parties game the nomination process in order to get “heads we win, tails you lose”. And with all of the evidence that the vote tabulation systems are fixed (just like a slot machine), I’m more inclined to stay home next election.

  26. Fiat (not the car) money makes it possible to separate the creation of value from the store of value, and in the process devalues the work that went into creating the value in the first place. Once we fell off the wagon in the late 19th century, and started down the fiat currency road, the end was predetermined. Our electoral system mandated it. Politicians got rewarded for it. The feedback loop was closed, and loop gain started increasing. The loop is now unstable, we are approaching the Nyquist limit.

    The only reason the USA is not Zimbabwe, or Weimar Germany right now is hundreds of years of quadrillions of stored value in the system. Trillions of man-hours of work and frugality went into that store, and most of it has been spent in the last 50 years. The end of the stored value has come, and only what is currently being earned is keeping this ship with a screen bottom afloat.

  27. I think South Park got it exactly right in 2016: You can vote for Giant Douche or Shit Sandwich.

    An election is just a multiple choice poll. Someone asks a question and gives you a few choices as answers. If none of them are correct, what are you to do? Consider the following example:


    1) B
    2) 16
    3) A better tomorrow.

    Ayn Rand said A=A and was mocked for it. In the absence of any other information, the only truth is that A=A, but that’s not a choice. So you guess. Oh, there’s the write-in candidate spot, but they aren’t even counted anymore, because the machines aren’t set up to read them. Much ink (and blood) has been spilled trying to prove one of the choices is correct, but ultimately none of them are right.

  28. Almost everything President Trump accomplished in four years has been undone since Jan 20, except one thing. The Clintons are finished, forever. And that is why I voted for him in 2016, so my vote did count.

  29. “You voted them in; you have no right to complain,” he says in his famous rant on the subject.

    Non sequitur – not everyone who votes is voting “them in.” He is ignoring the votes against. Kind of an obvious point, but it is being ignored when he conflates “the vote” with the “vote in the affirmative.”

    I would argue that not voting means you have no right to complain.

    Voting by itself, however, is simply not enough to change things. We must continue to educate ourselves and, where possible, others, and speak (and write) the truth boldly. We must continue to shun those who would take our liberty and seek (and support) those who are like-minded, not just for political office, but as our own associates in life.

    • ‘speak (and write) the truth boldly’ — Anon

      US Treasury report

      Feb 2021 spending: $559 billion
      Feb 2021 revenue: $248 billion
      Feb 2021 deficit: $311 billion

      Got wheelbarrows?

  30. The first person I ever voted FOR in my life (as opposed to voting against someone I find repugnant, which is most of them) was Donald Trump, not because I thought he’d be Americas savior, but because I thought it would be entertaining as hell. And it was fun to see so many smug lefties in government, academics and media gnashing their teeth at the big orange meanie and the dumb hillbillies who sneaked into the polls and voted for him. That sky-screaming person of ambiguous sexuality on inauguration day was worth it alone.
    But Trump’s election was an aberration they made sure to fix in 2020. Generally, I think if voting really mattered, they wouldn’t let us do it.

    • Exactly. I have voted in all my post 18yo life. I had somewhat confidence that the right results happened even considering likely fraud. This year has proven that if the government does not want the will of the people to be reflected in the vote they can easily change the results as we watch it happen. I am really struggling with whether I ever vote in a federal election again as it is now blatantly clear the elections are rigged. I will likely stick to the local and state races from now on.

        • Hi Amy,

          I read that a while back – and I appreciate the woman’s anger. I’m angry, too. I dislike voting,too. And yet I’ll still vote – because voting doesn’t mean one cannot also pursue other avenues for effecting change at the same time. So long as there is a vote, leaving it to others to vote leaves it to the very people who make voting a problem for those of us who despise voting.

          • I was pissed off about what transpired and stated Why bother to vote? Screw them and screw their system. My husband pointed out that that’s just what the left is hoping we will do. If we all check out, they won’t even need to cheat. So yes, I will continue this futile exercise in futility awhile longer.

            • Amy, I must respectfully disagree with the “If we all check out they win” line of reasoning.
              If the 74 million who voted for Trump sat out the next election, it would be the biggest political story in American history. Whoever won, far from being empowered, would be scared out of his wits. Imagine seeing “Ignore the bastards!” bumper stickers on half the cars in the parking lot. It would be truly a second American Revolution.
              Educate the people around you as best you can. Actively discriminate against statist morons. If I were still an employer, I would include an economics quiz in my hiring. If leftists hate capitalism so much, let them live without its benefits.

              • If the disgruntled voters actually went on strike, they’d have to back it up with more than words. Do you really think those in power now, including our current phony POTUS, really care HOW they got into power? All they care about is that NOW they HAVE it.

                What would speak with greater effect is if the American public goes on a TAX strike. Hence why I advocate a lifestyle of provident living, live simply, grow your own food and/or raise your own livestock, generate your own electricity if you can, BARTER for things, reduce consumption, i.e. GO OFF THE GRID. Quit slavishly watching the crap that passes for “entertainment”; there’s so much to just DO, be it a hobby, a side business, and there’s books, great ones, just gathering dust on bookshelves, that should be READ. If we cut off the Gott-damned boob tube, we cut off the primary means of our being propagandized. If you’re so damned concerned at “immoral” influences, well, fer Chrissake’s, don’t invite them into your living room every nite, and park the brats in front of the idiot box! Nor just allow the little darlings to “Tweet”, “Face-chat”, or engage in any of that idiotic social media bullshit.

                • Hi Douglas,
                  The ability to support yourself “off-grid” is good, but it would be a grave mistake to abandon the voluntary division of labor that has made us rich. Self-sufficiency is a recipe for massive poverty and misery, a return to a primitive hand-to-mouth existence. Recognizing this does not make me an advocate for “slavishly watching the crap.”
                  A tax strike would be great, but how is that ever going to happen so long as people believe they must file into the polling place on command like trained monkeys? The precursor has to be the kind of mass non-participation that I described. Once people saw that their world did not collapse because they didn’t vote, they would gain the courage to disobey and stop paying.

                  • Roland, there’s nothing that says that if you can profit ON the grid that you should entirely disconnect yourself just to spite the PTB (and thereby cut off your own ‘nose’ ,so to speak). It’s having the ABILITY to detach and be self-sufficient that’s important. Sorry, I can’t be responsible for the nation’s prosperity nor that of my neighbors, I CAN be responsible for my own, and if that benefits my neighbors and my country, all the better. I say, however, it’s short-sighted and irresponsible for those of us that have the means and the skills to be self-sufficient, to be able to live, maybe not necessarily with all the luxuries one might want, in a provident manner, especially when SHTF. I garden not b/c I’ve duped myself into thinking the effort is worth the meager savings over jumping onto the truck and heading over to Walley World or Winco, but b/c I get exercise, a sense of satisfaction, and SKILLS in doing so. Having a 500-gallon tank of diesel and a suitable generator, and I can minimally operate, at least for awhile, vital refrigeration and/or telecommunications, and that’s good for about a dozen fills on the truck. A few sidearms and AR-pattern carbines might not be enough to engage the National Guard in a pitched battle, but they’ll help to fend off a few “desperadoes”.

                    There’s a saying in my faith…”If ye are prepared, ye shall not FEAR.”

                  • Nasy, Nay, Roland!

                    Self-sufficency is IS true wealth. No one else profits from your labor or increase, but you! You are in full control, and you get to enjoy a rich natural life in the environment from which we were created, and from whence comes all true wealth and sustenance- and while doing so, you are actually improving your own property and making it more valuable; you are there to be with and teach your kids your skills, et.c etc.
                    THAT my friend, is true wealth, which can not be reckoned by mere numbers on a balance sheet- it is a direct economy, not at all dependent upon the manipulations of currencies or the availability of credit, or artificial rules, or what anyone else does or decrees. It is freedom AND wealth.
                    You can voluntarily trade with your neighbors/the local community, so that one guy/family does not have to produce every single thing themselves or practice every single trade……
                    The “division of labor” is not voluntary- it requires that people be puit in positions which force them to spend their lives doing things that no sane person would choose to do- and to be forced to support systems which will perpetuate that economy via artificial means. Hence bailouts, various “insurances” billed as taxes; centralized banking; wars…yada, yada….
                    Put a kernel of seed corn in the earth, and it will produce hundreds of tasty kernels of corn for you- a yeild of several-thousand percent.
                    OTOH, trade the same amount of time and labor that it took you to tend that corn, for a mere wage…and you may have enough to buy one ear of corn…hybridized GMO corn whose kernels will not continue the cycle/not produce anything for you, but will make you a perpetual customer of Big Ag, subsidized farmers, bankers, Monsanto and Kroger.
                    Trading one’s time, labor, and autonomy for a mere stipend is the biggest fool’s game in the history of the world. There is a reason why the communists outlaw private property……

                    • Hi Nunz,
                      “You can voluntarily trade with your neighbors/the local community, so that one guy/family does not have to produce every single thing themselves or practice every single trade……”
                      That IS the division of labor. Why limit it to your immediate community? If you need a battery for your tractor, good luck finding a neighbor who can build you one.

                    • Hey Roland!
                      What?! You don’t live nextdoor to Bob The Battery-maker?
                      Ideally, why have a tractor? On a small scale, just doing stuff by hand is perfectly fine- or, for more intense stuff, you can grow what you need to support a horse…and if ya have two horses (or mules, or oxen…) they’ll even reproduce themselves!
                      Hey, I used to have a neighbor who had a pair of mules and some horse(come mule)-drawn farm equipment…it was pretty darn cool. (He’d make his own maple syrup too. Now I understand why real syrup is so expensive!).

            • Amy,
              How’d that work out in ’16? The people didn’t “check out” and the left didn’t win….but we got medical martial law, the biggest military budget in the history of the world, CARES, bumpstock ban, persecution of national heroes Assange and Snowden, more illegal invaders, Clinton/Obama/Biden-gate swept under the rug, and the one who helped the Clintons get away with murder got appointed to the SCOTUS.

              Sounds to me like the left did win….it’s just that those who believe campaign speeches failed to notice because they’re too busy believing lies.

    • Election fraud in large Democrat controlled states and cities has corrupted the election process such that free and fair federal elections and statewide elections (in Democrat controlled states) are no longer possible. Voting in local elections and involvement in local politics is still important. Nullification/non-enforcement of corrupt federal mandates at the state level and nullification/non-enforcement of state mandates at the local level may keep a level of freedom alive in the short term. In the longer term. political separation is the only answer to the technocratic tyranny and slavery planned by the global elite.

  31. ‘he was also a man who believed in “helping” other people . . . to other people’s stuff, via the vote’ — EP

    “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.

    “From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy.” – Alexander Fraser Tytler

    Tomorrow the former superpower known as the United States crosses the Rubicon into Third World status, as its senile ‘president’ signs off on an epic $1.9 trillion lard barrel.

    Now Tytler’s Law comes into play. At its current rate of QE, the Federal Reserve will ‘purchase’ the Treasury debt needed to fund this fiscal blowout in just under two years, using thin-air keystroke currency.

    Voters don’t know the detailed workings of the simplistic shell game underlying Jerome Powell’s titanic scale of monetary fraud. What they do know is that now they can vote themselves anything they want: an income; a new vehicle; free rent; a pony. Cost is no object.

    DemonRat politicians correspondingly believe that their party can stay in power forever if they keep the kited-check cornucopia flowing.

    Their grave error is to think such recklessness is sustainable without consequences. Using Venezuela, Zimbabwe and Argentina as policy models unfailingly will produce the same results achieved in those sad places: runaway inflation, currency depreciation and capital flight; followed by widespread poverty and headlong social collapse.

    From Day One of this socialist New Era, we must relentlessly focus the blame on those responsible. Just as with Obamacare, DemonRats pushed through ARPA (American Ruination Porkfest Abomination of 2021) with margins of one vote in the Senate and nine votes in the House. They OWN this sh*t.

    Rhetorically, we need to relentlessly ridicule DemonRats, mocking them to their fool faces from sunup to sundown, then banging pans outside their windows till the purple dawn.

    MAKE THESE PILFERING POLTROONS PAY for destroying our prosperity with their reeking Scheißwelle of counterfeit Yellenschrift.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here