Exclusive to STR

It is time again. In September this year the state of Sweden will hold democratic elections for parliament. And with that comes enormous media coverage; it seems everything worth reporting on the news is politics, politics, politics. The media can’t get enough of this madness; they write column after column, page up and page down telling everybody about propositions for new silly political statements or policies.  

Most of the things reported are not important; they are not important to anyone but the politicians themselves. If you are not on television or mentioned in the newspapers, you don’t exist in the public mind, and that makes it very hard or even impossible to be (re)elected. I guess that is the logic for the power hungry. So they try to do whatever they can to get the media’s attention. And the media are happy to tell people about those great political achievements of recent years and the great political plans for the future.  

The problem is people start talking politics and they tend to do so for as long as the election campaigns and media reporting go on. So I will frequently be asked the question, “Who will you vote for?” That kind of troubles me, because I don’t want to talk politics – especially not party politics or the new power grab policies. Party politics bores the hell out of me, and I should know—I’ve done it myself for ten years.  

Some years ago I had a different approach: I actually thought people asking me about voting was a great opportunity to tell them why their hero politician or favorite policy is nothing but evil. If I could just convince a few of them that what they advocate is really bad for everybody, then perhaps the world can be changed. That seemed like a pretty good idea.  

Let me tell you, that is not how the world works. People tend to get angry with people telling them they are wrong, and when they get angry, reason and rational arguments are worthless. They feel they are right, and you just can’t reason with a “feeling” mind.  The "voting happy" feel from deep down in their souls that some stupid government policy is what separates the current state of affairs from paradise.  What stands between their revelation of what should be done and the current state of affairs is whoever is not supporting their great cause. These people are brain dead rather than brainwashed, so why spend your precious time trying to reason with them?  

Nowadays I am way too smart to talk party politics and discuss different policies with ordinary people (yes, I’m elitist). Most people aren’t interested in knowing what I really think about their precious policy anyway, they’re just interested in telling me how good they feel it is. But I don’t care. I couldn’t care less. So I don’t go there.  

But I still get that one stupid question that kind of is the trademark of brain dead people: “Who will you vote for?” The people asking that question are totally “in the box” and obviously can’t think without someone telling them to – and what they should think. I don’t say this simply to provoke you (if you are one of those people) or to show you how much I despise voters (even though I do). It is a matter of fact.  

This one question they ask tells you more about these people than they realize. It takes for granted that you should vote, that you will vote, and that you already are (or should be) in the process of choosing who to vote for (not whether to vote). That’s wrong, wrong, and wrong, since I don’t think I should vote – I won’t vote, and I’ve no reason to think about who not to vote for.  

They simply take for granted I’m as much into the system thinking as they are, but I’m not. What terrifies me is the one and only reason they ask this question: to convince me of the correctness of their choice. They are not interested in knowing who I will vote for, only to tell me I’m wrong if I’m thinking of voting for the wrong guy or party. So here we have stupid people who cannot think outside the box, who automatically think this is the case for everybody else too, but still want to impose their will on everybody. And to top it all off, they want me to subject myself and my property (without question) to politicians because they “know better” and therefore should have the power to tell me what I can and can’t do.  

Right, that makes a lot of sense. You have to be brain dead to fall for that; in a society of blind people, the one-eyed man can lead the way, but I’m afraid I have two good eyes to see with. There is no way I’m letting these blind people lead me, and take my money to do their dirty work.  

So what asking this simple and pretty “normal” question is all about, is people wanting me to give up everything for nothing. “Who will you vote for?” doesn’t really mean anything; it is just something people say so that they can go on to fill your mind with evil unthinking. I’m way too smart to fall for that ugly trick (and I’m way too smart not to give up the right to my life only to put a piece of paper with somebody’s name on it in a box). So one can simply reply: “I don’t vote.” That should make them shut up, at least for a few seconds, and that’s enough time to move away and start talking to someone else. Right?  

Wrong. If you’ve tried it, you know it doesn’t work. There is no real escape. The first few seconds this brain dead trooper stands confused and doesn’t know what to think, but it doesn’t take long for him to realize something is wrong. Sure, you have time to escape when the voting junkie tries to understand what happened, but he will soon come after you.  

Did you really think you could get away that easily? Sorry, that’s not how it works. Saying you don’t vote means you are one of those anti-democratic devils they warn you about in school and on television. So you need to be convinced of the good of the system, and if that doesn’t work, you will have to be destroyed. This might not be how these people think, but it is how they act.  

I’ve tried this “I don’t vote” approach many times, and unless the person who’s talking to you has a Ph.D. in philosophy, there is nothing about you he will find interesting. Saying you don’t vote means only that you’re evil (“anti-democratic”), and so the person will go on to tell you how magnificent democracy is, that you have no right to complain if you don’t vote (can someone please explain that logic?), that it is your obligation to vote for some guy you’ve never met, and that without your vote, this great civilization could crumble to pieces and leave us all with chaos and anarchy (that’s considered a bad thing).  

Suddenly everything bad that has happened, and everything that will happen, is your fault – unless you vote. There is simply no way out, it’s just like with any other kind of fundamentalism: either you believe exactly what the fundamentalist believes, or you are pure evil and need to be destroyed.  

If you try to be accommodating and respond to all the logical fallacies presented as proof that you should vote, then you are totally screwed. I’ve done this at parties, and what happens is more people show up offering more empty rhetoric in support for their democratic friend in need. (Especially if people have been drinking.) There’s no way out, you’re trapped and the evening is lost. No one will listen to what you have to say or any reasons you have for not voting; all they want is for you to change your mind.  

In a way, it is very interesting that people get so agitated with the simple statement that you will do something other than put a piece of paper in a box on a certain date. It is also interesting that they feel such a need to make you one of them, and that they could spend hours trying to, through repeating what everybody everywhere is always repeating. And all of this energy only to make you put that piece of paper in the ballot box!  

So people are literally attacking you with stupid slogans and arguments impossible to understand. This is just like you were trying to cancel your membership in a cult. Am I exaggerating? No, this actually happens, and the people doing it are ordinary, peaceful people. Or perhaps I should say: ordinary citizens. They have been effectively brainwashed through public schooling and television, and now they keep repeating the lies they have been taught to repeat. “War is Peace; Slavery is Freedom.”  

I don’t ask for their opinion, and I certainly do not ask them to try to convince me of their political beliefs. As a matter of fact, I didn’t start this in any way. All I did was answer a stupid question with a simple sentence: “I don’t vote.” And that starts a mindless fury among people and they all want their share in the persuasion campaign.  

OK, I admit: All people aren’t that aggressive, but the most non-aggressive of them clearly signal their loathing of my position. There are also some people who do ask “why” or “how come,” but they aren’t whole-heartedly interested. They just ask because they feel they need to ask, and that usually makes the people with greater democratic convictions, and a need to show it, start the campaign. There are always a few people who would gladly ruin a nice party to “get” me – because I don’t vote.  

So why don’t I just walk away? Because I cannot. Either these people follow you around until you lock yourself into the bathroom, or they will start spreading the news of the “stupid” guy who doesn’t vote and can’t deliver a good argument why (like they would hear it if I did). “He’s anti-democratic.” That’s a total party killer. These people are nothing but an oral posse who will not listen to reason or leave you alone. Don’t I have a right to self-defense? What about the right to be left alone? It doesn’t exist when it comes to democracy and the divine act of voting.  

What we have here is an unbearable situation. Like the enforcement of power politics weren’t enough, people more or less force their political convictions on you. Not being interested is but a reason for them to go on further, so there are only two real alternatives: endure, or live a hermit’s life (since that’s the only way to avoid these people).  

Voters and political junkies probably don’t know it themselves (that’s what is so great with brainwashing), but they are double oppressors. They may feel like victims now and then, but it is their system and their policies and they support it by voting. Voters are the people who effectively maintain political power over society and thereby over you. Even though you, being a non-voter, have nothing to do with their system and don’t support it in any way, they claim the right to force you to comply with whatever rules they see fit. It is “democratic,” you see. They vote and decide what to do with your life and your property; they say it is “freedom,” and in a way it is – their freedom to force you to comply with their rules.  

But they do all this indirectly and therefore claim they have no guilt in any injustice caused by the system. Actually, they are voting to minimize such “misuse” of a good system. The reason there is still injustice is that some people tend to vote for the wrong guy/party, or that the right guy/party still hasn’t been able (due to budget/time/mandate/whatever constraints) to enact all the necessary laws. Paradise will come, it is just too bad you need to crack a few eggs to make an omelet (and of course you are one of those eggs).  

Voters don’t crack the eggs themselves, but they sure make it happen through politics. But they also do their share of direct oppression in the sense that they not only support a system that effectively stifles every attempt of their fellow men to live freely, they also actively try to brainwash you to become one of them. So they perpetuate the imperfect system and create more voting junkies – and they demand you listen to their propaganda.  

Even though most of them are totally unaware of their double partaking in this scam (they are, after all, brain dead/washed), they are responsible and should be held accountable. Not understanding it is a bad thing to kill someone doesn’t make you less of a murderer if you do, it only makes you less empathic or intelligent. So voting doesn’t make you not responsible for political oppression, it makes you a “useful idiot” to the power elite.  

This all means there is no reason for you, as a peaceful, non-voting libertarian, to show them respect. On the contrary, you should show them disrespect and not let them enjoy your fun and valuable company. If they are not willing to treat you decently, then why hang out with them? They don’t deserve you.  

What I’m proposing is to shun voters; stay out of their reach and try not to interact with them in any way. These people are not only brain dead; they are actively seeking a way to subdue you and make you one of them. They are bad for your health, at least when discussing politics. So let them scratch each others’ backs, collectively pay tribute to the greatness of democracy, and enjoy the company of their brain dead compadres.  

Stay out of their way, keep distance. If you are out of reach, you are out of touch and will at least avoid the obstinate propaganda. There is still the oppression of government to deal with, so you need the time alone or along like-minded individuals. Just for fun, if you can, get a few of your non-voting friends together to actively ignore the ballot bandits and show them you do exist and that you are not some loner. It is quite safe – they will only come after you if you are alone.  

After the elections, most of them won’t bother you anymore, at least not as frequently. Politics is only important to people and the media establishment when the political class requires the people’s full attention (i.e. when they need your support). In-between elections, you will find it a lot easier to hang out with voters; it is as if political campaigns trigger people into aggressive political zombies. There are still moments when you need to keep distance, but those moments appear less frequent between elections.  

Think of what you’re doing and who you hang out with. There are so many interesting and cool non-voters out there, so why hang with voters? Withdraw your support and your company. It is your right to shun voters.

March 23, 2006