Should I Vote?

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I am a Canadian citizen living in New Brunswick. Should I vote federally or provincially, or neither? I don't really agree with the arguement that voting supports capitalism through the act of voting itself. However, I could be convinced that voting perpetuates capitalism.

Would voting for the liberals to stop the conservatives or voting for the NDP help? From an anarchist perspective, does voting simply perpetuate the states power? After all, no party that gains control of the state will relinquish a reasonable amount of state authority. However, voting does seem to have some impact on social issues, and it can help people in some ways.

I am extremely confused on whether or not to vote - when to vote - and what voting means. Chomsky says he votes, but most extreme leftists such as Goldman did not support voting.

Thoughts?

[anomaly]

I think there are far better ways to 'help people' than by electing some rich bureacrat to do it. Voting does perpetuate capitalism, and it does not matter in the least. Look at your choices: you can either vote for that politician, who will act in the interests of the bourgeoisie while appearing to act in the interests of the proletariat; or that one, who does not make any illusions about acting in the interests of the bourgeoisie.

As Marx wrote (not exact), the proletariat gets to vote every few years on which particular representative of the bourgeoisie will oppress them. So if you like voting for oppressors, go ahead and soak in the wonders of bourgeois democracy! :lol:

However, if you want to be an anarchist, definitely do not waste your time voting. In fact, if it's possible, protest against bourgeois democracy instead of participating in it!

[ComradeOm]

Chomsky is a fool. Voting is like deciding which bastard wields the whip.

[Roses in the Hospital]

In the long term it's not going to change anything, but voting for one particular party might make short-term differences, so if you think one particular party has decent policies, or conversly if one has particular damaging policies then go for it, you've got nothing to lose. I only really vote to make sure the concervatives don't get back in...

[Eoin Dubh]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 19 2006, 11:17 PM
I am a Canadian citizen living in New Brunswick. Should I vote federally or provincially, or neither? I don't really agree with the arguement that voting supports capitalism through the act of voting itself. However, I could be convinced that voting perpetuates capitalism.

Would voting for the liberals to stop the conservatives or voting for the NDP help? From an anarchist perspective, does voting simply perpetuate the states power? After all, no party that gains control of the state will relinquish a reasonable amount of state authority. However, voting does seem to have some impact on social issues, and it can help people in some ways.

I am extremely confused on whether or not to vote - when to vote - and what voting means. Chomsky says he votes, but most extreme leftists such as Goldman did not support voting.

Thoughts?
I think that strategic voting is foolish, vote for what you believe in.

I used to destroy my ballot, and I understand why some choose to do so or even not vote at all. But now I feel we should use all options available and voting is one.

I recall Chomsky saying that Government is one institution which a person can have a partial influence on through the vote, unlike corporate entities etc.
Women fought very hard for the right to vote, and in Canada, Chinese could not vote until the late 1940's and some aboriginal people were denied the right to vote until the 1960's!

Independant candidates can often be a good choice, and certain individual NDP and Green candidates.
Reformist politics are not unlike a dog chasing its tail, yet some initiatives, from some candidates, deserve support and can make a difference.

And hey, if you are lucky, there may be one of Canadas two Communist parties on the ballot!!

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

So far I have heard decent arguments against voting, for voting strategically, and for voting to support a candidate you support.

Right now I have wayed my options and am still unsure:

1. Not voting - it seems like voting may have a short-term benefit and a long-term negative affect.

2. Vote liberal to stop the conservatives, which seems like it is just voting in fear.

3. Voting NDP even though I don't really support the party, and I won't vote for one of our authoritarian communist parties.

[redstar2000]

Voting for Socialism...or Anything (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1083036842&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

Lights! Cameras! Democracy! (http://www.redstar2000papers.com/theory.php?subaction=showfull&id=1083337292&archive=&cnshow=headlines&start_from=&ucat=&)

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[violencia.Proletariat]

I only really vote to make sure the concervatives don't get back in...

And eventually thats all your politics will be, "As long as it aint conservative". Wage slavery and other capitalist opression is JUST as consistent under "liberal" parties as it is under conservative.


or conversly if one has particular damaging policies

Then you do what the French are doing this very moment.


if you think one particular party has decent policies

Compared to what? The conservatives?


you've got nothing to lose

Actually you do. You waste your time and the risk of jury duty selection. If you get sucked into reformism, you waste your life. :(

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

What about countries that are much more advanced than other democratic areas? The Netherlands and Sweden, for instance?

[Eleutherios]

I don't vote. Even if I believed in voting and had voted against Bush, it wouldn't have done anything. I live in New York state, which everybody knew was going to go to Kerry. There are too many millions of votes out there for my individual vote to matter one bit. Even if it was exactly tied except for my vote, it still wouldn't matter. It would be deemed "too close to call" and there would be a lot of bickering over numbers and recounts until the Supreme Court basically appointed a president.

The only reason left for voting is to make a statement that you don't like some particular candidate who is the greater of two evils. But if you want to make a statement, don't vote—get on a soapbox and shout out your ideas on the issues that matter to you. It accomplishes nothing to silently mark that you think the sum of Rich Guy #1's opinions are superior (or at least less intolerable) than the sum of Rich Guy #2's opinions.

Does it matter to you who is president? The vast majority of your interactions with the government and with capitalism will remain identical under a conservative administration and under a liberal administration. The rules which govern how your employer can boss you around, how the policeman can beat and kidnap you, how the landlord can rob you, how the soldier can shoot you, do not change. It is these people that we should be focused on, for without them the president would be powerless.

[Roses in the Hospital]

and eventually thats all your politics will be, "As long as it aint conservative".

Don't underestimate me.


Wage slavery and other capitalist opression is JUST as consistent under "liberal" parties as it is under conservative

I don't dispute that. But for me life in the short-term is going to be far more tolerable under a Labour or even Liberal Democrat government than it would be under a Tory one...

[anomaly]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 20 2006, 03:36 PM
What about countries that are much more advanced than other democratic areas? The Netherlands and Sweden, for instance?
And the capitalists are more 'benevolent' in the Netherlands and Sweden? This is certainly news to me! :lol:

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Scandinavian countries have free health care and education. Furthermore, if memory serves me correctly, the wage gaps are lower, and they typically give more money per capita to foreign countries seeking aid.

They are still capitalist an oppressive, I am sure, but did voting make a difference there or did grassroots protest convince the ruling class to give a little?

[anomaly]

Any reforms made are most often in the interests of some variant of capital (if they are in the interests of labor, then it probably was due to some direct action). Do not be fooled by any clever illusions. The Scandinavian nations are capitalist just the same. We do not wish to merely lighten our chains, but shed them completely! And that cannot be done with any reformist measure.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I'd be quite interested in any direct information someone has on why Scandinavian countries are ahead of the rest of the world. Moreover, information that suggests direction action rather than voting has caused this change.

Personally, I know reformism cannot remove the chains of the proletariat, but I have no objections to lightening them while we wait for revolution - unless this has a negative affect on revolution.

Despite all the interesting opinions and arguments, I am still quite confused. I am leaning towards not voting, but I am not confident in this. Furthermore, I am lacking what I consider solid justifications for not voting when it comes to certain areas - one of those being the issue of Scandinavian countries and their success (which may or may not have come from voting).

[bezdomni]

If you haven't anything to do on election day, go write in "none of the above" or a ficticious person.

Assuming you can have write-in candidates in Canada. I'm pretty sure you can.

Bourgeois democracy changes nothing.

[Eoin Dubh]

Originally posted by Dooga Aetrus [email protected] 20 2006, 02:35 PM
2. Vote liberal to stop the conservatives, which seems like it is just voting in fear.

I won't vote for one of our authoritarian communist parties.
You would consider voting for the Coniberals to stop the Libervatives......................but you would not vote for one of the two Communist parties?!?


Have a closer look at what you would be supporting vs. what you find "authoritarian".

http://www.liberal.ca/default_e.aspx

http://www.cpcml.ca/

http://www.communist-party.ca/

[anomaly]

And once elected, will your magical Communist Parties wave your wand, ignore material reality, and build communism?

[YSR]

The only things worth voting for are local elections, for people who you actually KNOW and can act in actively anti-capitalist ways. Otherwise bourgeois democracy is, as stated above, bullshit.

Though I think something can be said for voting on ballot initiatives, such as the (very few) we have in the States. For instance, my state is going to have an ballot on an amendment to our constitution to ban gay marriage. By casting my vote in this way, I am not giving power to any state or capitalist.

Unless there's some giant logical error here that I've missed.

[which doctor]

Let's say that you're a homosexual and there is a very close election coming up. One candidate is very conservative and wants to outlaw even civil unions for homosexuals. The other candidate is a moderate liberal who wants to allow same-sex marriage.

You gonna vote? I know I would.

[Eoin Dubh]

Originally posted by [email protected] 21 2006, 01:49 AM
And once elected, will your magical Communist Parties wave your wand, ignore material reality, and build communism?
Magical Communist parties?

Off the top of my head, there was only Salvador Allende voted into national power as a Marxist.

He didn't have the opportunity to commence "wand waving" now did he?

There was a certain person in Germany voted into office. Guess what happened next?

[anomaly]

Do you adhere to historical materialism?

[Eoin Dubh]

Do you adhere to anarchism?

[anomaly]

Yes, but how does that answer my question?

[Eoin Dubh]

It doesn't.
I adhere to whatever will achieve tangible results in my lifetime.

The revolution is now. Not tomorrow. Certainly not yesterday.

Again, I feel we should use all options. Saying that though, I am under no illusions about bourgeois democracy etc. I also (shudder) use money.
You vote federally, provincially once in four years, civic elections every three years. Each dollar you spend is a vote, and is more effective than the political vote. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't use it.
Big deal, jury selection. Just say some outrageous shit and they will pass you by.
Don't shower for two weeks and quaff mouthwash during the interview. It's not like the draft or a prison farm, you can get out of it very easily.

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by Eoin [email protected] 21 2006, 12:21 PM
Big deal, jury selection. Just say some outrageous shit and they will pass you by.
Don't shower for two weeks and quaff mouthwash during the interview. It's not like the draft or a prison farm, you can get out of it very easily.
Or you can say that you advocate the revolutionary overthrow of the United States government, and that the capitalist judicial system is just a contest to see who can afford the better lawyer and amounts to nothing more than a sham. Also say that the use of Bibles for swearing upon in the courtroom offends you because all religions are just tools for keeping the masses disempowered, obedient and ignorant.

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

I'm starting to see the arguments for not voting, and am strongly leaning towards doing that. Thanks for the help.

http://www.strike-the-root.com/vote.html

That website was also helpful if anyone is interested in checking it out.