I Abstain In 2008: The Second American Revolution

A Call To Arms in 2008: The Second American Revolution


The time has come for all patriots to revive the spirit of liberty and make clear the mandate of the people, we no longer accept the insult this nation has become toward those who birthed the first revolution. And for the fist time in history, another revolution is not only possible but winnable.

During the last half of the 18th century, the first American Revolution had a tenuous chance for success because of the relatively level playing field of military technology of the day. With exception to the naval assistance of the French (which did not play a small role), the majority of the struggle was the violence of cannon-to-cannon, musket-to-musket, bayonet-to-bayonet, and the will of liberty. In this first half of the 21st century, no such opportunity exists for a revolution upon which the brute force of brave people may rely.

In 2008, our "call to arms" carries no anticipation of violence, no blood, no siege, and no brutality. For today the field of play for this revolution is not level, for the first time in all history it is tipped in favor of the people. Our weapon of the Second American Revolution is the Internet and media.


I need waste no words on those patriots of liberty who agree that the time for revolution is now. But, most assuredly there are those of you who see no need for a revolution. To you I postulate that a systematic deception has clouded your perception of this nation, and lulled you into an apathetic acceptance of the aberration we endure. Every four years you accept two deplorable choices of insufficient policies and absurdly divisive rhetoric for the leadership of the nation. A decision between the least horrifying representative of two morally bankrupt political parties is no choice at all. It's one more step down the road that tramples the ideals of our founders and shatters the hopes of our children.


We need not itemize the need for revolution. This website and thousands more like it are testament to the diseased government allowed to fester from the apathy deviously contrived from the lack of choices presented to the people. With the power of media and the Internet in our grasp, we finally have the ability to say, no more.

I Abstain in 2008

A simple statement. Hardly a battle cry. But a protest that renounces the system we've been forced to follow and demands real change that matters.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," you revolt against the divisive politics of blame enjoyed by the two parties.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," your dictates of conscience are made clear.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," you seek to restore the path of liberty and feel good about being patriotic again.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," you tell the world that we no longer accept the lesser of two evils.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," you must do so not for sensationalism of anarchistic disruption, but out of tearful love for this nation.

When you say, "I Abstain in 2008," you signal the Second American Revolution, a rebellion born of intelligent rejection and a call to rebuild the governance of this nation once eloquently stated as, "Of the people, by the people, for the people."



When you "Abstain in 2008" it must be clearly heard. You cannot stay home. You must flood the polls. You must register to vote. You must proclaim your participation in the system, broken as it is. But do not vote on national candidates, cast your vote for local matters.

Proclaim your intent online. Let the media follow the buzz.

Proclaim your intent at the polls Let the media report on the results.


I Abstain in 2008

We finally have the means, the power, and the ability to bring about real change. The rest is up to you.

Of course, since something like 50-60% of the American voting population never votes, this really doesn't make any sort of astounding statement. And the obvious side effect is that abstaining magnifies the impact of those who do vote.

bravo! bravo!

i abstain in 2008.
or as i like to say:

"Election 2008: VOTE WITH YOUR MIDDLE FINGER!"


sure a portion of the population never votes but they are apathetic. ours isnt a vote for apathy. it is a vote for the rejection of a corrupt system in which the only voice heard is that of the big global corporations, while the voice of the people is muted and silenced. no one vote in '08! lets how them what we think of their corrupt system!

Don't vote Revolt.

Get your t-shirt here.

www.cafepress.com...

reply to post by mister.old.school


No Problem, I haven't had sex in months!

Oh, wait, abstain from the vote....yeh..

I agree my black and white friend. I was going to waste my vote on Ron Paul, but as Bush said, Abstinence first!

Let's ignore the people who ignore our issues!

(edit to add that I was joking on that first line. Look, don't judge me...)

[edit on 28-7-2008 by jasonjnelson]

reply to post by jasonjnelson


i was going to vote for ron paul too but i saw how they completly stole votes from him in the primaries. that was the last bit of hope i had in the system.

after i saw them hose ron paul i said to myself...its time to show them we know they are all cheaters and frauds. vote with your middle finger this year everyone!

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
Of course, since something like 50-60% of the American voting population never votes, this really doesn't make any sort of astounding statement. And the obvious side effect is that abstaining magnifies the impact of those who do vote.

No doubt! If you don't like Obama....

I'm hoping you don't vote. And I applaud anyone on this forum who is anti-obama and anti-vote at the same time.

If you are pro-Obama, well then I hope you are pro-vote as well, because I DO vote, and am hoping to have a vast amount of voters who will magnify my vote.

w00t! 2008

reply to post by mister.old.school


Pardon me if I'm a little slow on the uptake, but aren't most revolutions based on the desire for greater political voice? I fail to see how disowning mine accomplishes that objective.

There are certain forms of government wherein causing a low voter turnout (or rather low voter participation, as you have at quite commendably noted that it is not enough to merely stay home) is an effective political manuever, and there are also situations wherein international pressure can be brought to bear by such means. The situation in America at present seems unlikely to be affected by such a tactic however.


To formulate an effective solution, we must first identify the problem. The problem you have pointed out is that our political system is dominated by two corrupt, unresponsive parties who are content to merely vie for the title of "lesser evil" in each election, rather than seeking a true mandate of the people.

So the question becomes how to either change or replace the existing political parties. I do not believe they will fundamentally change in the short term. We should attempt to replace them, and if they are not destroyed they will over time be forced to reform themselves in order to survive.

What prevents the political parties from being replaced?

1. The requirements for new parties to achieve ballot access are much higher than those on the existing major parties. For a third party to place candidates on every ballot in America requires almost 10 times as many signitures or registrations as is required for the existing major parties.

2. The existing parties have superior fundraising ability because special interests don't throw their money away backing candidates who will never actually get into office. They also have huge bases to draw upon.


So the answer is reasonably clear if you ask me. The "No Confidence Movement" must organize a recognized political party, register its own voters, but put forward no candidates until it has achieved sufficient size. Even then the primary purpose of the party should not be to become a dominant political force, and should never intend to put forward candidates everywhere they are able to, but only in those instances where such a move allows them to tip the balance of power and thus bargain for changes in the process.

In the short term, the party's unpledged voters and unpledged dollars become a balance holder between the two major parties that can be used to buy small compromises.

Better still, as the parties voter registration base grows over time (largely due to members who register, never do anything, but remain registered under the party simply because they never have to re-register) the party eventually gains ballot access equal to that of the major parties, and has the right to set its own unique primary rules, just like any party.

Thus a "None of the Above" Party would be able to play both sides against the middle not to achieve policy aims, but to improve the system whereby such aims are achieved, and also to set an example for the people of what they should expect from the other parties in terms of clear and voter-accountable proceedures.

I disagree. Not voting will accomplish nothing. It won't effect change and the PTB will simply get what they want (as usual). A FAR better solution is to VOTE OUT every single elected official in every election across the country. Every single incumbent voted out of their jobs. Clean house. 100% NO exceptions. End the careers of every professional politician in the country.

That, my friends, will send a MUCH larger message then simply staying home and saying 'nah, nah, nah... we didn't vote so there'.

You say you want a revolution? Well you ain't gonna get one sitting on your couches. Vote them out. Vote them ALL out.

reply to post by mister.old.school


I agree wholeheartedly, screw the current system of tyranny. I abstain.

I would first like to say that you have offered a brilliantly written piece that is both compelling and moving. I am totally on board with you here, as I am sure many are. I do not mean to be apathetic here but I must ask, what do we stand to gain. I am not sure the powers that care whether we vote or not. I think they may enjoy our choice of abstinence, it would save the MSM a whole mess to explain away. I want to make it perfectly clear that I am not arguing with you in the slightest, I am just looking for a little more education on the matter.

What is our reward for the revolution? How long will we have to abstain to bring them down?

I graciously ask for enlightenment.

as always in politics you must always vote for the LEAST WORSE.

Not voting is only slowly renouncing to our freedom to choose our leaders.

reply to post by mister.old.school


You really put the rev in Revolution.

Your people did nothing when revolution was really in the air in the 1960's, your government sent in the troops and shot down your own students as they shouted about the war back then. Americans have lost the will to do anything, never mind a revolution.

What a great time to call for arms, what a special time to call for a Revolution.....when bush is leaving office, having done all he could.

The Revolution

When I say "I Abstain in 2008"... nobody will care. How is this a "revolution"? If anything your abstinence only strengthens the position of the PTB... I'm sure they're shaking in their boots right now.
Although the OP sound nice, it's a bunch of hot air and won't (like most things lately) affect ANYTHING.

Edit: "Let the media follow the buzz"... you mean the one controled by the PTB? Good luck with that.

[edit on 28-7-2008 by mecheng]

reply to post by mister.old.school

I agree with almost every word you said, strongly, UNTIL you decided to play with the font size. "I abstain in 2008." You KNOW we have big problems. But that's a dumb solution. It might make a lot of sense in a drug induced revelation, but that's not the answer right now. It is most certainly time for a revolution--not to peak, but to begin. Your "Call to Arms" was very empowering!

So empowering that I would want to post it on a Facebook note for everyone I know to read! Actually, it would be for everyone in my network to read, if I choose to make it so. And with regional networks and multiple networks, that's really a LOT OF PEOPLE. People who would be able to read my note, which was your Call to Arms.

And that's just me, one person. We can all do it. That's powerful.

The Internet Revolution allows information to be transmitted anywhere, instantly, to anyone. In terms of access to information, this is UNPRECEDENTED.

Thus, we agree, is the power of the Internet, which becomes our weapon.

However, based on the way things are going, the reality is that people are going to vote and someone is going to get elected, whether you and everyone you reach abstain or not.

But people need to know what you said in that Call to Arms, because it was well written. People need to know what you mentioned about the first Revolution in the 18th century, about how it's different today in the 21st century, and about "those who see no need for revolution." They ARE lulled. And they need to KNOW that!

So get the word out! Get the knowledge out!

The revolution is powered by what the PEOPLE can do, which is surprisingly a lot once they awake from their dreamstate.

reply to post by mister.old.school


Everything that you've stated has the ring of truth.Yet to completly abstain from casting a vote in the national election actually sends the wrong message.I refuse to vote for either of the two party cantidates,because no matter how you dress a turd it still stinks.
Votes are numbers.These people operate by the numbers.They are actually more concerned by the numbers they don't recieve than the numbers they do.
A third party vote at the very least sends a message to them that we know what they are up to.A third party vote at the most would bring about real change!

Don't abstain,rearrange!!

reply to post by mister.old.school

I like your conviction but your logic seems a little weak here..

How is abstaining sending any kind of message other than "I didn't vote"?

Mister Old School, Well said my man. It is time for tough choices, hard lines and no backing down. When the two party system has devolved, by design imho, to two sides of the same bloody coin, we have no choice. No choice but to stand up and say NO! No choice but to tear the mother down and start over.

Downtown, ordered one. )

This is rather silly to do nothing is not a revolution to do somthing is so cast your vote for sombody but not one of the two main canidates. We are only at the begining of this revolution and like all revolutions it takes time, hard work, blood, sweat, death, and tears.

Originally posted by TheRepublic
i was going to vote for ron paul too but i saw how they completly stole votes from him in the primaries. that was the last bit of hope i had in the system.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
Pardon me if I'm a little slow on the uptake, but aren't most revolutions based on the desire for greater political voice? I fail to see how disowning mine accomplishes that objective.

I would've voted for Dr. Paul too...Until the "media blackout" hit so hard on his campaign. For Christ's sake, they even refused to let him debate with other candidates! Since McCain became the official choice from the primaries & Dr. Paul announced his withdrawl from the campaign, I decided to go back to the same vote I've always used for any Presidential Election: No Confidence. At least I'm not abstaining from using what little voice the corrupted government lets me have...Abstaining to vote just tells the PTB that I shut up instead of speaking out.

Originally posted by jtma508
A FAR better solution is to VOTE OUT every single elected official in every election across the country. Every single incumbent voted out of their jobs. Clean house. 100% NO exceptions. End the careers of every professional politician in the country.

Well, I never liked the idea of "career politicians" anyway...They spend too much time & effort trying to raise funds for their next campaign & don't get any real work done. Since they're also getting the biggest campaign contributions from Big Corp Interests, that also gives them more logical reason to ignore the Public in favor of their biggest "contributors."

I'd like to see term-limits placed on all Federal Offices, not just the Pres. The government established by the Founding Forefathers truly saw those positions as Public Service jobs...An interruption in their lives to do good works for the Nation on the whole, then go back to their own lives & families once their term was done. We can return to those honorable roots by limiting the number of terms.

But as far as "cleaning house" in the more immediate future goes...The Kick Them All Out Project. However, I think it may be safe to let people like Ron Paul stay in Congress...After all, he's had over 30 years of defending the Constitution under his belt already. Using the blanket-term "no exceptions" probably isn't best, but it will take some looking into everyone's service & voting records to make individual judgements on worthyness.