[Pollyticks] Voting against major parties

The general populace doesn't grasp the national debt or economics. Therefore, the lack of grasp by the politicians will be of no consequence to their rep.

Zur said:

You think there's a kind of idiocracy (like the movie) in place ?

Click to expand...

yes. the movie is no comedy, it's a fair warning.

I live in the States. I don’t vote, and won’t until there’s something worth voting for.

[m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmllMESH6CQ[/m]

I live in a part of the world where Russell Brand somehow became considered something akin to a political scientist or a philosopher. That part of the world is called the Internet. Lately, more often than not, I wish to abstain.

He’s pretty explicit about not being a political scientist and that’s exactly why his message resonates so strongly with so many people:

“Like most people I am utterly disenchanted by politics. Like most people I regard politicians as frauds and liars and the current political system as nothing more than a bureaucratic means for furthering the augmentation and advantages of economic elites.”

Bull Moose party 2016!

wait, wrong century.

cryptophreak said:

I live in the States. I don’t vote, and won’t until there’s something worth voting for.

Click to expand...

What about state and local elections? Do you not want to have a say in who is running the place, at all? Really, the local elections are generally the more important ones in our lives here in the States.

das_ben said:

I live in a part of the world where Russell Brand somehow became considered something akin to a political scientist or a philosopher.

Click to expand...

but he makes a great point in that particular clip.

Crotale said:

Really, the local elections are generally the more important ones in our lives here in the States.

Click to expand...

I’m not interested in organizing bake sales any more than I want to choose between identical* Presidential candidates; I want a libertarian socialist revolution—or can my local PTA help with that?

*Driven primarily by business interest at the expense of the public, supports mass surveillance, thinks terrorism is only wrong when other people do it, etc.

Something I think we all knew already.

Just a piece to throw into the mix:

According to a Princeton University study, the US is now officially an oligarchy, not a democracy.

Source: BBC

cryptophreak said:

I’m not interested in organizing bake sales any more than I want to choose between identical* Presidential candidates; I want a libertarian socialist revolution—or can my local PTA help with that?

*Driven primarily by business interest at the expense of the public, supports mass surveillance, thinks terrorism is only wrong when other people do it, etc.

Click to expand...

That is a fairly short-sighted view you have there. You are acquiescing all say you might have to legislation (federal, state and local) and policy that affects you and your family.

Selerox said:

Just a piece to throw into the mix:

According to a Princeton University study, the US is now officially an oligarchy, not a democracy.

Source: BBC

Click to expand...

Meh, we have been an oligarchy ever since we were formed. Back then only white male landowners could vote. At the time the south consisted mostly of plantations with a huge wealth disparity not just between the slaves but also the white field workers (slave drivers, generally very poor) vs the plantation owner. Basically states that were made up of mostly plantations effectively were represented by the 1%, at least until President Jackson came along (I hate Jackson's guts, but he did change the voting laws).

Lets not forget about literacy tests introduced to hurt Irish-Catholic immigrants-and later blacks, which further stifled who got represented.

But then again I guess it isn't about who gets elected, its about what they are asked to do in office, which is mostly influenced by lobbyists and campaign donations.

Jacks:Revenge said:

but he makes a great point in that particular clip.

Click to expand...

No he doesn't, he makes some cute jokes, but those are not at all similar.

Russell Brand is an idiot. The worst thing, however, is that he is clever and funny, and so his complete and utter ignorance, and complete and utter desire to educate himself (this lack of knowledge and refusal to change that, even though he's talking about it is what I'm calling idiocy), is masked by cute little lines that resonate with other people that don't know anything either.

Not voting is the stupidest thing out there. It's true that the system is set up in a messed up way, so that we only have two candidates, and these two people are the best funded morons, instead of the most qualified individuals, but to claim that voting for something you believe in doesn't work is to be completely ridiculous.

Hell, look at the Tea Party. Sure, the majority of the tea party is a bunch of racist, backwards idiots who claim to love the constitution but lack the brainpower to actually comprehend it (leading to a lot of hilariously ironic statements on their part). Sure, the tea party movement is bankrolled by people like the Koch's and is the not-quite-official party of the Fox News Network, but it is a BIG change in the republican party and it pretty accurately reflects the beliefs and desires of the vast majority of the people who have joined it. AND it is VERY effective, changing the political climate of our country, altering the conversation in a real way and getting a lot of laws out there that echo their beliefs. Real change, real action, real, effective, political movement.

And what has happened from people who echo brand's philosophy? NOTHING. Occupy Wallstreet was impassioned, but it was a group of disparate people who refused to find a central message, was made up of people who didn't vote, and it had the grand total effect of sticking your finger up your ass and telling your representative that he resembled your shit covered digit. A nice sentiment, sure, but nothing changes and at the end of the day, you're the only one with shit on their hands.

And Crytpo (this is mostly all aimed at you anyways), if you really think that your local government is AT ALL akin to the PTA, you're even more of an idiot. Not only does your local government have more to do with regulating your actual day to do life, not only do they have more power to change things that actually matter to you, but they are ALSO easy to get into contact with, AND your votes and participation can make massive and completely powerful changes to the climate.

As to the OP: I vote, mostly, for the major parties, because in the US, the third party candidates are all whackjobs who espouse policies that sometimes are quite nice on paper, but which possess zero ability to be implemented. Except for on a local level, and then it's really anyone's guess as to who I'll vote for (as the actual personality of the person tends to matter a whole lot more than any party affiliation).

dragonfliet said:

No he doesn't, he makes some cute jokes, but those are not at all similar.

Russell Brand is an idiot. The worst thing, however, is that he is clever and funny, and so his complete and utter ignorance, and complete and utter desire to educate himself (this lack of knowledge and refusal to change that, even though he's talking about it is what I'm calling idiocy), is masked by cute little lines that resonate with other people that don't know anything either.

Click to expand...

I'm gonna' ignore the remaining paragraphs and say that you're reading way too far into his spiel. no one here is calling Russel Brand a genius.
but in that 1 minute and 55 seconds, he makes an extremely valid point about how utterly broken the current system of Western "democracy" has become; especially in the US.

dragonfliet said:

Not voting is the stupidest thing out there. It's true that the system is set up in a messed up way, so that we only have two candidates, and these two people are the best funded morons, instead of the most qualified individuals, but to claim that voting for something you believe in doesn't work is to be completely ridiculous.

Click to expand...

Well, it isn’t. Your entire Tea Party digression aside—because a vote for the Tea Party is not at all concerning to Goldman Sachs, and that’s not a coincidence—voting is completely useless at getting anywhere worth going. You and I have the power to make trivial adjustments to the system, but wherever our propositions might endanger the interests of the ruling class, those ideas are somehow unfeasible.

There are, exactly as you suggest, only two parties in the States with any real influence, and they differ so little that I don’t care which is in power. They are the twin arms of the Business Party, and whether the right hand or the left is speaking from the podium is a meaningless detail. You’re entirely right in that not voting doesn’t effect revolution, but neither does voting. It is also a waste of time to vote when the choices are Shit and Extra-Strength Shit. And it gives the illusion that I support one or the other.

dragonfliet said:

And Crytpo (this is mostly all aimed at you anyways), if you really think that your local government is AT ALL akin to the PTA, you're even more of an idiot. Not only does your local government have more to do with regulating your actual day to do life, not only do they have more power to change things that actually matter to you, but they are ALSO easy to get into contact with, AND your votes and participation can make massive and completely powerful changes to the climate.

Click to expand...

I don’t know what to do with this except to ask which goals of mine you imagine can be achieved through participation in local government, and how.

Russel Brand is an idiot.

Jacks:Revenge said:

I'm gonna' ignore the remaining paragraphs and say that you're reading way too far into his spiel. no one here is calling Russel Brand a genius.
but in that 1 minute and 55 seconds, he makes an extremely valid point about how utterly broken the current system of Western "democracy" has become; especially in the US.

Click to expand...

And I'm saying it's not a particularly valid point at all. It certainly feels like there is little you can do, but that is not only untrue, it's the easy way out, to claim that inaction is your only action. And it's not like democracy "has become" like this, it has always been like this, this is how anything happens, this is the only way in which you can broadly get things done.

People seem to think that because change is typically slow and difficult that it doesn't happen, but it does, and often, but it is the process of many people and a lot of time, and this simply doesn't sit well with people with no real intelligence and no patience, and so they say I want x problem solved (giving no thought as to why things are even like that), and then, six months later, when that problem isn't solved, they throw their hands up and say the process doesn't work. There are massive problems with the political system, and the US is certainly one with lots of problems, but to claim that only the rich get anything, and that not participating is any way to respond is to ignore all of history. Not only are things not as bad as this would imply (not to say they're rosy), but the ONLY way to get things done is to participate instead of claiming that apathy is action. Like I said: he makes some cute jokes, but as far as a point goes, it's worthless.