Non-voting

In his On The Duty of Civil Disobedience (1849), Henry David Thoreau asked:

How does it become a man to behave toward this American government to-day? I answer that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it . . . . What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to the wrong which I condemn.

Readers of Strike The Root recognize that there are two principal demands that their governments make upon them: pay your taxes and vote. (Of course, there are many other "demands," such as military service, send your children to school, have a drivers license, etc., but many of these are ancillary to the primary means of government survival, which is the collection of taxes.)

Now, of these two principal demands,  taxation carries criminal sanctions: Pay your money or we imprison your body and/or confiscate your property. However, as yet in most nations of the world, failure to vote in government elections carries no penalty.

Governments, like all other hierarchical institutions, depend upon the cooperation and, at least, the tacit consent of those over whom they exercise power. In other words, government soldiers and police can force people to do things they don't want to do, but in the long run--in the face of adamant opposition--such coercion is either too expensive or too futile to accomplish its goals of subjugating entire populations. It is far simpler to motivate people to do what you want them to do, rather than forcing them to do it by pointing guns at them all the time. As Boris Yeltsin supposedly said, "You can build a throne with bayonets, but you can't sit on it long."

Educating generations of parents and children in government schools and teaching them to be patriotic and support their government in political elections is one of the fundamental ways governments garner public support. Citizens are taught that it is both their right and duty to vote. But all this is done with an ulterior motive in mind. As Theodore Lowi, in his book INCOMPLETE CONQUEST: GOVERNING AMERICA pointed out:

Participation is an instrument of [government] conquest because it encourages people to give their consent to being governed . . . . Deeply embedded in people's sense of fair play is the principle that those who play the game must accept the outcome. Those who participate in politics are similarly committed, even if they are consistently on the losing side. Why do politicians plead with everyone to get out and vote? Because voting is the simplest and easiest form of participation [of supporting the state] by masses of people. Even though it is minimal participation, it is sufficient to commit all voters to being governed, regardless of who wins.

Not voting in government elections is one way of refusing to participate; of refusing to consent to government rule over your life. Non-voting may be seen as an act of personal secession, of exposing the myth behind "government by consent." There are many reasons, both moral and practical, for choosing "not to vote," and they have been discussed in my anthology, DISSENTING ELECTORATE. To briefly summarize:

Truth does not depend upon a majority vote. Two plus two equals four regardless of how many people vote that it equals five.

 

Individuals have rights which do not depend on the outcome of elections. Majorities of voters cannot vote away the rights of a single individual or groups of individuals.

 

Voting is implicitly a coercive act because it lends support to a compulsory government.

 

Voting reinforces the legitimacy of the state because the participation of the voters makes it appear that they approve of their government.

 

There are ways of opposing the state, other than by voting "against" the incumbents. (And remember, even if the opposition politicians are the lesser of two evils, they are still evil.) Such non-political methods as civil disobedience, non-violent resistance, home schooling, bettering one's self, and improving one's own understanding of voluntaryism all go far in robbing the government of its much sought after legitimacy.

As Thoreau pointed out, "All voting is a sort of gaming, like chequers or backgammon . . . . Even voting for the right is doing nothing for it." So whatever you do, don't play the government's game. Don't vote. Do something for the right.  

                                                                        ~ Carl Watner (December 2009)

The state has grown too big and powerful and conversely the individual appears small and powerless. Libertarians of all stripes can debate endlessly on why this has come about and where we should ideally be instead. When the question of what to do about it comes up, there is typically a moment of silence and perhaps a chuckle or two coupled with some frustrated cynicism. After this moment of consideration passes, a barrage of suggestions usually follows involving the premise "If only...
Exclusive to STR The beatings will continue until morale improves. ~ Unknown The Ron Paul for President Campaign has been the cause of much discussion among anarchists as to whether we should all jump on the bandwagon. The exposure of ideas we all hold dear during his campaign pertaining to the elimination of state agencies and policies, especially central banks, has reached a larger audience than any other source to my knowledge. The education of a willfully ignorant if not brainwashed...
Exclusive to STR One of the nice things about not voting is that one can enjoy a little sport at the expense of those who do. Let me share with you an example or three. A few days before November 4th, I visited a nearby town, and first called at the government postal monopoly for some stamps so that I could write to an innocent friend incarcerated in a government prison. Standing in line, I said pleasantly to my neighbor, "I hope you won't be voting, on Tuesday?" His face was, I tell...
Once upon a time they came down the aisles of convention halls, parading their cardboard signs, their lapel pins exclaiming their candidate of choice, and shouting their idea of the perfect political platform.  What began as a handful of hopeful Libertarians in 1971 became America’s third major political party.  By 1978, the Libertarian party had amassed a level of growth that would earn them remarkable...
Autumn looms and presidential elections will soon roll around, like droppings pushed by dung beetles. We will be exhorted to vote. Better advice would be not to vote. The proper response toward what we occasionally imagine to be democracy, methinks, is to retain one's self-respect by not participating in it. Voting in particular is an embarrassment, being a public display of weak character and low intelligence. Let us face the truth: Democracy, like spitting in public or the Roman games, is the...
Exclusive to STR October 9, 2006 What is the dividing line between civilization and savagery? This fascinates me. It seems so simple. It seems clear to all, in some instances, and yet bafflingly convoluted in others, and this lack of clarity I find difficult to fathom. Sex is a good place to go looking for answers, I do believe. A man I know stated he could not understand the concept of "spousal rape." He asked how could there be rape in a marriage since one of the prime components of...
I do not know when I first became convinced that the franchise was a 'right' I had little use for. All that I can say for certain is that, even when I believed in the mechanism of State, I never exercised it. To date I have been asked three times at Department of Restricting My Right to Move Freely (also known by its more pedestrian but less accurate name of the Department of Motor Vehicles) whether I wish to register to vote. I am happy to be able to say I have declined this gracious offer...
Political parties ' comprised of incumbents, candidates, voters, agendas, special interests, and platforms ' are the tools that the State uses to forge the chains of slavery for its citizens. The popular fiction of differences between political parties also perpetuates the enduring myth that citizens have only one means of governing themselves ' by voting for a proxy. Not only is this notion patently false, the only real winner in the game is the State itself. The entire process consists of...
Exclusive to STR March 7, 2007 Thanks to Angelo Mike for the stark reminder of how ugly statism really is. It's terribly useful to read the firsthand account of someone who loves liberty yet ventures into the very belly of the beast, Washington D.C. We can all use a reminder of the actual horror of reality from time to time. Thanks for sharing your experience of falling on the sword with this field work! Aren't life's most painful lessons usually the most valuable? I know a wise old...
  Exclusive to STR   Politics is a religion. Like all religions, politics is also chock full of its own rites and rituals. In the West, voting is the most seductive--and perhaps, most important--ritual in the repertoire of rites of this particular cult. Specifically, it is used to help maintain the fantasy that politics is a peaceful art. By assaulting our consciousness regularly with the rhythmical, methodical, and incessant...
October 31, 2008 Jesse Ventura, when he's not talking about 9-11, makes a lot of sense. Describing the two party system to Larry King, he said: '[W]hat you have today is like walking into the grocery store and you go to the soft drink department, and there is only Pepsi and Coke. Those are the two you get to choose from. There is no Mountain Dew, no Root Beer, no Orange . They're both colas; one is slightly sweeter than the other, depending on which side of the aisle you are on.' In an...
Original article "Freedom is ours for the taking; it will come through non-violent non-cooperation; not through the political process. The political process, such as voting, only strengthens the twisted root of tyranny. Refusing to participate in the political process takes away the deception governments exist by consent...." Column by Marc Stevens.
Even as a third grader, I knew something was rotten. Jimmy and Mike were running head-to-head as class president, and there seemed to be little coincidence that they were the most macho SOBs in the class. Both were slick, good-looking guys who exuded confidence and self-assurance. Jimmy and Mike, while not the brightest pupils in the pod, were keenly aware that the class presidency was a farce. 'If elected, I promise longer recess times, and I'll get us sodas for lunch instead of milk every day...