It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Leo Strauss
I remember people like you telling me it wouldn't matter if it was Bush or Gore! Well there was a difference!
Originally posted by wheresthetruth
TPTB do not take such chances. They are not gamblers. If the electoral process at the highest level was not a rigged and foregone conclusion from the beginning, more people on the ballot would get air time and debate time. Open forum debates with all of the candidates went away a long time ago because there is always a candidate that speaks the truth in a live and open forum and asks challenging questions of the other candidates and citizenry. The closer we get to global domination, the worse this process gets.
Besides, my write-in candidate is not going to win. I tried to get the word out about Bugs and Daffy, but I doubt many heard my message.
Originally posted by MemoryShock
Why do you think that the 'Powers That Be' would accept any percentage of chance regarding the leadership of this nation?
Originally posted by MemoryShock
Why is it then relevant to place a vote for one of two individuals likley conditioned and prepped for the role of such a vaunted position?
Tens of millions of Americans can vote but choose not to. They are castigated by their peers, but they have the right idea. We’re told that if you don’t vote you can’t complain, but voting, at least for the major parties, does not register much of a complaint at all. You might think you’re voting against the war or tax hikes, but it will instead be counted as just another voice of unity behind the dictatorial mandates of the chosen leader.
Is there a case to be made for voting? Indeed there is, if one believes that social order is a quality that can be instilled, by violence and other coercive means, by political authorities. I do not accept this proposition. To the contrary, I believe that social order is the product of unseen, spontaneous influences of which most of us are not consciously aware. The study of economics helped me to understand how we respond, marginally, to fluctuations that are continuously generated by one another’s self-seeking pursuits. I also came to understand that politics – like a rock thrown through a spider’s web – disrupts these informal processes as well as the existing patterns of interconnectedness upon which any social order depends.
This brings us to a word far too common, "taxation." In the current political climate, "taxation" means paying one's "fair share." It is unconscionable that Americans have arrived in a circumstance in which a man can be forced at gunpoint to surrender half of what is rightly his. The claim then, is this: that he was simply "discharging the debt he justly and honestly owed as his portion," or, in other words, "paying his fair share." Upon what justification does anyone owe this debt? The only foundation upon which this claim can be made is the underlying immoral selfishness of mankind.