I realize that this website is devoted to helping Democrats win, and right now we are all in the midst of the pre-primary frenzy, but I thought a different perspective (no, not Republican, silly, those guys eat babies) would be in order. It has often been said, and I believe, that, by developed world standards, America has two right wing parties (three if you count Libertarians) and no left wing parties save the comically inept Socialists.
Given this situation, what does a progressive thinker do when election time comes? Does one continue to vote with the less extreme right wingers (Democrats) in the hope that one day they will get lost in the dark hallways of the Capitol and veer left, or more realistically, that at least the Democrats can moderate the more extreme Republican positions while meekly trotting behind the elephant’s rump, like an apologetic and mildly retarded carnie?
I cannot bring myself to vote for the lesser of the two evils. With voting comes personal responsibility. In an oppressive society, one is always asked to add his imprimatur to the brutal actions of the regime, to make sure that everybody is equally guilty and there will not anyone innocent to dissent. Most totalitarian societies have compulsive voting for his reason – to force you to vote for the butchers and by extension, to make you a part of the butchery. Fortunately, while we do have propaganda campaigns with threatening names like "Vote or Die," here in America, the citizens are not yet required to participate and can choose to abstain. And in fact, the largest percentage in any American election is the non-voter, so abstention is an option that is attractive to many for many different reasons.
The state, and activist civil society, such as this website, will tell you that non-voting is reprehensible. By not voting, you are allowing the worst elements of society to rule. But what if all you are asked to vote for is two representatives of these worst elements? What if the choice you are given is not between good and evil, but between bad and evil? Must you give your support to bad to prevent evil? Morally speaking, this is a compromise with oneself which allows one to support bad people. And in a situation when one is not forced to do so, why would anyone choose to do bad things? Many might argue with this position by saying that, by opposing evil with bad, one is actually doing good. This might be true if these were your only two alternatives. The only Democratic President in my memory, Bill Clinton, gutted welfare and immigration rights with the help of the Republican Congress (or is the other way around), pushed through NAFTA and basically fiddled while Rome burned. I voted for Clinton once, and I still feel the stain of my culpability for his actions. This will not cause me to vote Republican, but there is a third alternative – one of non-participation.
Let us forget the abstract morality of the situation and focus on the practical, which is how many supporters of the lesser evil justify their actions. If you do not vote Democrat, the Republicans will run this country into the ground and set the world ablaze, they say. Hey, woman, they say, the Republicans will take your right to choose! Hey, homosexual, the Republicans will allow discrimination against you! Hey, African American, the Republicans will resegregate you! Aside from being classic fear mongering tactics exactly like the ones being used by the Republicans to whip up their gullible base, this is untrue. Whether the state is a democracy, a monarchy, a dictatorship, an anarchy or an empire, the state is not a machine, but is composed of people, who will not do anything else than what is their will. After the state commits some atrocity, people like to pretend to have distance from it. The Soviets killed all those people, or the Nazis did. No, actually, a bunch of Russian and German people thought it was a good idea to make beasts of themselves under cover of an ideology. When the same Russians were commanded to fire on demonstrators by the same state in 1991, they refused, because they did not want to.
People do only what they judge to be in their interest, and this is true whether the command comes from their representatives in Congress or their King. But of course, the evil regimes punish you for disobeying. No, actually, the regime is only a word, and in reality, people living under those regimes punish each other for disobeying their will. Therefore, we are equally under threat of having tyrannical actions forced against us no matter what the technical name of our particular regime is. Right now, the US holds more prisoners than any other country in the world, it kills more people than does any other country in the world (only abroad thankfully) and it causes more harm to the planet itself than does any other country. So where is the restraining power of democracy? It is non-existent, because we are condone what is done. If we did not, it would not be done, for we are the ones doing it, regardless of the political fiction in which we clothe our actions. So if we as a people want to segregate those of a minority skin color, this will be done by our democratic leaders or our King or whoever. And we do not, it will not. We as people stand by and allow the same minority to remain impoverished and incarcerated in our midst, and we do nothing but talk about how bad it is. Maybe if there was less bullshit election talking time, people would actually be confronted with the reality of their actions and could no longer hide behind the pretense that only the state acts, and sadly, it doesn’t act because the guy I voted for either didn’t get elected or turned out to be a liar.
And what happens when the Democrats do the same thing as the Republicans after having threatened their voters with the fires of Republican hell? At that point, it is too late, and there is no alternative, you have already given them your vote and are tainted with whatever sick policy they choose to implement. For every Iraq there is a Serbia, and, sadly, every other American war in the twentieth century was initiated by Democrats. The enmity between the parties is stoked artificially from both sides by people who hold basically the same positions, but need to fire up the voting base with symbolic divisive issues that will cause people to vote for one party out of fear or hatred for the other, rather than because they agree with their own party’s position. But it will not lead to change, it will not lead to implementation of any needed policies, it will lead only to a continuation of the partisan hysteria.
Practically speaking, one cannot hope to achieve change by repeating actions that have not produce that change in the past. One cannot vote again and again for Democrats based on campaign promises, then become bitterly disappointed by the lack of implementation and outright lies that follow as soon as they are elected. One must do something else. Imagine for a moment that in the upcoming primaries there was 2 percent turnout. Then, in the general election, there was 5 percent turnout. And again in the next election. How long could the US continue to pretend to be a beacon of democracy and freedom with such a record, how long before everyone would have to acknowledge that the system is broken, does not represent the wishes of the people, and needs a major overhaul. How long until third parties begin emerging as serious contenders, when all you need is 2 percent of the population to vote for you to attain victory?
The fear mongers from both sides will say that this will open us up to "kook" "fringe" parties, both of which terms are favorites of the establishment figures, but in a society as deeply established as this one, it is not easy to turn the ship of state around. There is no possibility of any real political hijacking of the country when the country is not run by the politicians, but by business interests and world markets. The first thing that will stop happening is the redistribution of wealth from citizens to special interest groups, who will have to get our money through the usual way of commerce. The second thing that will stop happening is that this country will cede its position as world policeman and self appointed moral authority, and, lacking any political credibility, assume a more restrained position internationally. And the third thing is that we would be able to ignore these ridiculous ritualized elections as they roll around and the red white and blue clad hustlers swarm us with their poll tested speeches and insincere positions.
I am not advocating the total abandonment of democratic institutions. I believe that, as in the ancient democracies of which the current one is a cruel mockery, there is a place for voting and public participation on the local level, where one can see the politician, know the politician and hold the politician accountable, and where the issues are known to me and impact me, rather than just symbolic battles. But on anything of a larger scale, accountability is lost and all you have left is a public spectacle, designed to rile up the gullible and incite the angry. And I, for one, say that I will not participate in my own exploitation and degradation, and I will not put my stamp of approval on something that I cannot approve.