This Is The End, Beautiful Friend The End

[Speaker to Animals]

If he did not vote for any of this garbage, then he has the perfect excuse to complain about the mess voters created. It is the exact opposite.

[Fife]

Fuck voting.

For those of you interested in the actual evil of our democratic / republicanism system, here's some Frank Chodorov from 1945:

If We Quit Voting

There was one question put to me by my charming annoyer that I deftly sidestepped, for the day was sultry and the answer called for some mental effort. The question: "What would happen if we quit voting?"

If you are curious about the result of noneating you come upon the question of why we eat. So, the query put to me by the lady brings up the reason for voting. The theory of government by elected representatives is that these fellows are hired by the voting citizenry to take care of all matters relating to their common interests. However, it is different from ordinary employment in that the representative is not under specific orders, but is given blanket authority to do what he believes desirable for the public welfare in any and all circumstances, subject to constitutional limitations. In all matters relating to public affairs the will of the individual is transferred to the elected agent, whose responsibility is commensurate with the power thus invested in him.

It is this transference of power from voter to elected agents that is the crux of republicanism. The transference is well-nigh absolute. Even the constitutional limitations are not so in fact, since they can be circumvented by legal devices in the hands of the agents. Except for the tenuous process of impeachment, the mandate is irrevocable. For the abuse or misuse of the mandate the only recourse left to the principals, the people, is to oust the agents at the next election. But when we oust the rascals, do we not, as a matter of course, invite a new crowd? It all adds up to the fact that by voting them out of power, the people put the running of their community life into the hands of a separate group, upon whose wisdom and integrity the fate of the community rests.

All this would change if we quit voting. Such abstinence would be tantamount to this notice to politicians: since we as individuals have decided to look after our affairs, your services are no longer needed. Having assumed social power we must, as individuals, assume social responsibility — provided, of course, the politicians accept their discharge. The job of running the community would fall on each and all of us. We might hire an expert to tell us about the most improved firefighting apparatus, or a manager to look after cleaning the streets, or an engineer to build us a bridge; but the final decision, particularly in the matter of raising funds to defray costs, would rest with the townhall meeting. The hired specialists would have no authority other than that necessary for the performance of their contractual duties; coercive power, which is the essence of political authority, would be exercised, if necessary, only by the committee of the whole.
. . .

In the frontier days of our country there was little law, but much order, for the affairs of the community were in the hands of the citizenry. Although fiction may give an opposite impression, it is a fact that there was less per capita crime to take care of then than there is now when law pervades every turn and minute of our lives. What gave the West its wild and woolly reputation was the glamorous drama of intense community life. Everybody was keenly interested in the hanging of a cattle rustler; it was not done in the calculated quiet of a prison, with the dispatch of a mechanical system. The railriding of a violator of townhall dicta had to be the business of the town prosecutor, who was everybody.

Though the citizen's private musket was seldom used for the protection of life and property, its presence promised swift and positive justice, from which no legal chicanery offered escape, and its loud report announced the dignity of decency. Every crime was committed against the public, not the law, and therefore the public made an ado about it. Mistakes were made, to be sure, for human judgment is ever fallible; but, until the politician came, there was no deliberate malfeasance or misfeasance; until laws came, there were no violations, and the code of human decency made for order.

So, if we should quit voting for parties and candidates, we would individually reassume responsibility for our acts and, therefore, responsibility for the common good. There would be no way of dodging the verdict of the marketplace; we would take back only in proportion to our contribution. Any attempt to profit at the expense of a neighbor or the community would be quickly spotted and as quickly squelched, for everybody would recognize a threat to himself in the slightest indulgence of injustice. Since nobody would have the power to enforce monopoly conditions, none would obtain. Order would be maintained by the rules of existence, the natural laws of economics.

That is, if the politicians would permit themselves to be thus ousted from their positions of power and privilege.

I doubt it.

[Fife]

[DBTrek]

Fife and Kim Jong Un: Fuck roads. Fuck voting.

[kybkh]

So let’s say you are playing a video game. White women are worth .05 pts per 1.0 votes.

Black women are worth .8 pts per 1.0 votes.

Who adds more to the bottom line? Convincing 10 black women to vote is worth convincing 800 white women to. Or something.

Happy Cinco de Mayo!

[clubgop]

So let’s say you are playing a video game. White women are worth .05 pts per 1.0 votes.

Black women are worth .8 pts per 1.0 votes.

Who adds more to the bottom line? Convincing 10 black women to vote is worth convincing 800 white women to. Or something.

Happy Cinco de Mayo!

[Fife]

Fife and Kim Jong Un: Fuck roads. Fuck voting.

I love roads. Don't you?

[Heraclius]

So let’s say you are playing a video game. White women are worth .05 pts per 1.0 votes.

Black women are worth .8 pts per 1.0 votes.

Who adds more to the bottom line? Convincing 10 black women to vote is worth convincing 800 white women to. Or something.

Happy Cinco de Mayo!

If you're arguing that the black voting bloc is extremely powerful in determining the Democrat candidate/the general election, shouldn't your argument be based on:
1) How active that bloc is in primaries and whether they are far more active compared to other groups of people.
2) The uniformity of opinions in that bloc which will determine how efficient it is to appeal to that group as the same political message will appeal to that group.

I'm not really sure how one group can be "worth" more points so don't really understand your video-game analogy.

[Penner]

So let’s say you are playing a video game. White women are worth .05 pts per 1.0 votes.

Black women are worth .8 pts per 1.0 votes.

Who adds more to the bottom line? Convincing 10 black women to vote is worth convincing 800 white women to. Or something.

Happy Cinco de Mayo!

If you're arguing that the black voting bloc is extremely powerful in determining the Democrat candidate/the general election, shouldn't your argument be based on:
1) How active that bloc is in primaries and whether they are far more active compared to other groups of people.
2) The uniformity of opinions in that bloc which will determine how efficient it is to appeal to that group as the same political message will appeal to that group.

I'm not really sure how one group can be "worth" more points so don't really understand your video-game analogy.

In my opinion, he is trying to say that voting is useless for him because he isn't a member of a political party. I agree that his video game analogy is weak though. What really matters are how active each voting block is at recruiting members to vote on election day (aka turn out) is a very important winning strategy for anyone. Although, some groups (ie Americain Catholics) just don't have strong political voting blocks because their members hold diverse political ideologies and there isn't just "one" ideology that is the strongest among them. Instead, he is using black voters because it's generally believed that they do have "one" political ideology and do encourage other members to vote in the same way.

Overall most people don't vote in primaries are usually the most adherent of voters will bother to even turn up on election day to vote in their primaries. Not only that but some states have "closed" primaries where only registered political members of one party can only vote in people from their political party primaries and no one else.

[Ph64]

Fife and Kim Jong Un: Fuck roads. Fuck voting.

I love roads. Don't you?

Cars would have to be built beefier to survive lack of real paved roads, we'd all be driving ww2 jeeps, fairly easy to repair and built to last forever instead of be falling apart and obsolete in 10 years or less. Downside is?

People would have to drive slower, would learn that life isn't a panic rush to get to the next location asap while staring at your "smart" phone every 0.23 seconds to see who has msgd you. People would actually meet each other, have face to face contact, maybe even have to humble themselves to ask for help to get their vehicle out of that mudhole.... Hmm, downside is?