Sadly, for those being so critical of the non-voters, the Constitution does, in fact, give us all the right to free speech. Voting is not a prerequisite for that right. :-)

That means you have the freedom to say that you think we're lazy. You have the freedom to say we're bad citizens. You have the freedom to insist that we explain our actions. You have the freedom to tell us that you don't think our opinions matter. You have the freedom to urge us not to complain since we didn't vote.

And lucky for those of us who decided not to vote, we still have the inalienable right to complain all we want. No matter what you say, no matter what you insist, no matter how hard you deny it, fight it, and try to make it so... we're still going to enjoy all the rights and privileges that you do... and there's not a darn thing you can do about it! :-)

So how's that make you feel?

I was gonna vote for McCain....
But I stood by....

I guess now I can't complain,
because I stood by

They say get ready for Change
And I know why

Cuz I just stood by, I just stood by, I just stood by

bottom line: my vote did not count, or else ammounted to nill/nada/zilch



i did not vote for the Democrat nor the Republican presidential candidates,
i voted Constitution Party.

i voted against all the 'Incumbants' on my precincts ballot ==>
as i was hoping for new, political blood in the life of government

the Senator & Congressman from my district voted 'FOR' the TAR
P Bailout, yet they were reelected, sheeze---the people i live amongst

Something that's not getting much attention in this thread, but that MemoryShock has pointed out a few times, is that voting and participating in the election process is not the only way to have a political voice or a political impact, and in the current environment may even be one of the less effective ways.

What reading the OP alerted me to was that I was using the phrase "civic duty" to refer to voting, as we've been trained to do. This implies that:

1) the American population consists of two sorts of people – those who participate and those who don't

2) if you don't vote, you don't participate

3) if you do vote, you've done all you need to do.

All three of these statements, broken down like this, are suspect.

First, I think that any time a group is asked to accept a radical dichotomization like voter vs. non-voter (or believer vs. skeptic), the status quo is reinforced because the focus turns to clearing out the middle ground rather than meeting there. Rather than listen to Mr. Shock's reasons for not voting, and assessing his arguments and his other contributions to society, people are judging his action and then dismissing reason as rationalizing.

The idea that if you don't vote, you don't participate has received some attention here, although it's been mostly in the form of who has the right to complain. Mr. Shock explicitly argues that he sees his activity here at ATS to be a part of his political action – that in devoting time to moderating this site, and thought to contributing, he is hoping to have an impact on people's awareness.

Before you dismiss this, ask yourselves whether a columnist has more real political effect by exposing his ideas to the public or by the single vote he casts.

Voting is not our only means of political action or impact.

The final statement, that if we do vote we have "done our duty" and can be satisfied, is honestly the one that has forced me to look inward the most. Because I have been guilty of looking at it that way. I don't like politics, and I'm not an activist. My life is pretty self-involved, or at least focused on those near to me rather than society as a whole.

Because I feel a responsibility to "do something" to deserve the rights I have as an American, I have voted, and then felt self-congratulatory that I've done my part, and superior to those who haven't.

And that feeling exaggerates the dichotomy and gives it a moral dimension that is hard to speak across, because no one wants to be judged. The truth is, MemoryShock has probably had more real impact politically than I have, because of his participation here (and if you haven't looked up some of his threads, I recommend doing so – they are well worth reading).

But maybe that's okay too – because it doesn't have to be contributors vs. non-contributors. We all act in our own sphere, and no matter what our actions are political whenever they affect our fellow citizens.

Originally posted by americandingbat
But maybe that's okay too – because it doesn't have to be contributors vs. non-contributors. We all act in our own sphere, and no matter what, our actions are political whenever they affect our fellow citizens.

I just wanted to redirect attention to the last sentence of ADB's post (which is excellent, by the way).

And there really isn't anything I can add to it.

I've done research on this topic for many years now. I am a former US Marine and on the internet I'm a whistleblower from Kosovo so I might as well get that over with.

I will tell you, voting is absolutely an effort of futility and a waste of time. I discovered that voting on the president means nothing. The Bilderbergers have the president chosen years before the election and once their man gets the expected election they have four years to pick another that will forment their steps to world government or he will win a reelection for another four years. In the meantime, if the president is not one of the globalist he will be assigned an advisor from either the Counsel of Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission or the Bilderbergers, and in most cases member from a combination of all of them. It is based on a globalist agenda to accomplish the passage of certain acts, get us in a war with a false flag, or achieve some sort of milestone to get us one step closer to world government. NOW, if the president gets a case of religion, case of conscious, change of heart he will be assassinated or put back on track by some sort of blackmail. This is the one of the missions of the CIA or NSA is to get mud on congressman or future presidential hopefuls to ensure they do what they are told to. This is the reality supported by research over the generations.

The Illuminati plays both sides of any war and in elections as well. You are correct in not voting as writing in names, voting because of some patriotic duty, or sense of responsibility is a waste of gas and time if you know the truth. McCain, Bush, Obama, and et al are all on the same agenda pretending to be in opposition. The CFR/Bilderbergers controls all of them save a few that might be legit. The media is controlled by the CFR to play up the one they have picked for president. They play down or discredit the ones that they don't want to get the votes. If the voting actually starts pilling up for the one they have not picked up they will rig the machines or create a scam to make sure their choice is picked to make it look good. This happened in Florida for Bush and the Supreme court actually picked Bush if you recall. Bush, Clinton and Bush were to slip in the necessary invasions and acts that would lead us into a dictatorship by filing over 1,000 letters that would give the government total control over all the government offices in the case of a declared national disaster and subsequent martial law which will lead to a dictatorship and the North American Union, and new currency, AMERO. Obama it appears is the trigger that they will somehow use to spark a race or internal war that will trigger martial law being declared. The trap is set..............

Originally posted by Heike
But the PTB says that all of that is wrong. To effect change you VOTE. Change from within by working with the system. What they aren't telling you is that politics and voting aren't going to change a thing. But as long as they can make most of us believe that they do (or can), they can USE them as a way to keep us from doing those other things that they don't want us to do because THOSE things (protesting, revolts, etc.) might actually change things, and change is the last thing THEY want.

Uncle Sam saying "stop complaining and go vote like a good citizen." equates pretty much in my mind to the Wizard of Oz saying "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."

Voting is the pacifier that keeps us from screaming our heads off because we're hungry. Politics is the funny play that distracts us from being concerned about people who are suffering and dying. This illusion of participation, of "our voice being heard" is what THEY are using to channel our frustration, disappointment, anger, and pain so that we won't collectively revolt and DEMAND real change.

"We live in a democracy so we have no one to blame but ourselves for the way things are." Heard that before? That's the guilt trip they're laying on us, and they play it as well as dear old Mom ever did. They aren't doing anything to us, we're doing it to ourselves. Never mind that the US isn't a democracy and never has been, and "government by the people and for the people" died before you were born.
end of quote
I figured the above was worth repeating. Voting IS an illusion since we all found out the hard way that the popular vote does not choose the president (Remember Al Gore?). We also found out the hard way that our voices fall on deaf ears in congress since the people there that we vote in do not have to vote the way we tell them to vote (the bailouts? the raises for the politicians? budgets? education? taxes? I could go on). We are told that our only recourse is to vote the congressman out in the next election. BTW, the U.S. is a REPUBLIC, just like Russia was a REPUBLIC the only difference was the meaningless word that came first.

Credit has been the illusion of prosperity in OZ and now that the curtain has been removed, do you think anyone is going to notice the little man with the big microphone?

Most people are intelligent so why do they allow all of this corrupt government and business? I have been studying the Indigenous cultures of the world (what's left of them) and most never had a government yet the cultures survived and the crime rates were next to nil. Granted, those cultures do not have all the fancy gadgets we take for granted, but they don't have to work 50-80 hours a week either. Is it just our greed for material possessions that make us think we need government to protect our property from others? Why do we need a government?





[edit on 10-12-2008 by peggy m]