The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Vote, Vote, Vote
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Have an opinion, no matter how uniformed:

Since even Republicans think quantity has a quality of its own, it goes without saying that felons should be able to vote. Non-citizens, too. And kids. Not just teenagers, but eight year-olds as well. They’re sure to vote for more candy and more Minecraft:

An interesting hypothetical poll question: What is more important, democracy or good government?

If mass mail-in balloting is now a feature of our electoral landscape–and given the inherent advantages it provides Democrats, it probably is–one upside is that it serves as another nail in the coffin of Koch Brothers conservatism. If every person in the country gets a ballot, Trump Republicanism retains an outside chance. Romney Republicanism, though, has not a hope in hell.

 
• Category: Arts/Letters, Culture/Society, Ideology • Tags: Democracy, Polling 
Hide 50 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. If mass mail-in balloting is now a feature of our electoral landscape–and given the inherent advantages it provides Democrats, it probably is–one upside is that it serves as another nail in the coffin of Koch Brothers conservatism. If every person in the country gets a ballot, Trump Republicanism retains an outside chance. Romney Republicanism, though, has not a hope in hell.

    Are we still thinking the election’s been decided already? :p

    If Trump wins, mail-in ballots might get the kibosh. He’s gonna have to do something to reform elections, and it may as well be that. France gets by well enough with a proxy voting system for absentee voters, apparently. (Proxy voting still offers scope for fraud, so perhaps dirty politicians won’t even object too much!)

    But even supposing widespread postal voting continues, I think it would benefit the Romney GOP. There’s a flaw in your logic: Romney’s politics are unpopular, therefore he’d fail under postal voting, unlike Biden. But Biden did fail. He “won” on a platform of giving AIDS to schoolchildren and war with Russia, or something like that – was that really popular?

    Barack Obama had to pretend like he wasn’t very much in favour of gay orgies marriage; Biden didn’t. That’s not just the changing social landscape at work: that’s a political campaign that doesn’t have to take a centrist position and doesn’t have to care about swing voters because they’re going to rely on fraud. (Wasn’t Biden campaigning in blue states right up til the end? Didn’t he pick a Californian for VP? Have you checked out Biden’s Twitter in the last few days of the campaign? Is that a guy reaching out to fence sitters, or bolstering his base?)

    Point being, postal voting doesn’t enfranchise more voters – it disenfranchises the existing ones – it facilitates vote fraud, and vote fraud facilitates the “victory” of unpopular candidates, as we just saw with Biden. In a hypothetical future of mass mail voting, then, Romney has a better path to victory than ever before: as long as he cuts the right deals with the people who fake the vote and the people who gaslight the public, he can be a shoo-in, and almost forego the formality of a campaign entirely. (Although red meat for the base is probably a good idea, since the political machine that delivers the votes needs cogs, as it were.)

    Indeed, we basically saw this happening already with Biden: didn’t all the neoconservatives and so on flee the Republican party and endorse Biden?

  2. I think Moldbug’s central insight is that the constant struggle for office that democracy necessitates creates a situation in which the worst rise to the top and good governance is secondary to considerations of power, and in a theoretical “national CEO” dictatorship, the office-holders wouldn’t have to make decisions based on future elections. I think this is pretty compelling. There’s something deeply unappealing to me about Moldbug’s idea, but if I am honest with myself, I think what I don’t like is the fact that without democracy, I wouldn’t have the illusion that I make a difference to anything. Reading Unz or following Twitter feeds would have no purpose.

    Anyway, even before reading Moldbug, I had already left behind the idea that everyone’s vote was equally important and equally desirable. The fact that large percentages of people don’t vote and yet seem to get along just fine under the regime demonstrates that voting is not necessary to buy in.

  3. So is this is a whitepill that appears after the blackpill coating is dissolved in a high-volume electoral solvent?

  4. @Chrisnonymous

    I think what I don’t like is the fact that without democracy, I wouldn’t have the illusion that I make a difference to anything.

    Look on the bright side: maybe without democracy, you wouldn’t be bamboozled into thinking that you could make a difference by voting, and therefore you’d do something that would make a difference. (Att: NSA and angry gun-toting morons: not violence!)

    It’s a myth that women and working-class men weren’t politically active prior to their getting the vote. They were very active, and had an enormous political impact: they were all members of societies and unions and committees and campaigns… Even since getting the vote, they probably made more impact with these methods than by voting.

    The problem with voting is it forces you into the party system, and thus constrains your political freedom of movement. Let’s imagine you’re pro-gun and pro-abortion. Pre-franchise, you’d support Planned Parenthood and the NRA: they’d hassle the government on your behalf, and if they didn’t do a good enough job, you’d transfer your support to alternative groups. Crucially: your friends at the NRA annual meeting would be split on Planned Parenthood, and vice versa.

    But as a voter, you support either the Republicans or the Democrats, selling out one or the other of your principles. Further: the private civic organisations would side with one party or the other as well: so Planned Parenthood becomes an adjunct of the Democrats and the NRA of the Republicans.

    It gets worse: private citizens would find their opinions clustering to match party platforms, so that, after a while, most people who are pro-gun would be anti-abortion, and so on. Say you’re anti-gun and agnostic on abortion: expressing an anti-gun opinion would signal to everyone that you were pro-abortion, and after getting called a baby-killer a few times, you’d probably start to resent the anti-abortion crowd and reflexively consider the opposite case. Meanwhile, most of your friends in anti-gun politics would be pro-abortion, and it’d rub off on you. And this is to say nothing of deliberate messaging from Democrat party bosses, who would try to make sure everyone who was anti-gun became anti-abortion as well. And vice versa.

    This dialectic – is it a dialectic? I don’t know what a dialectic is – plays out back and forth over and over again for a couple of hundred years and you end up where we are now, with total polarisation, and most of the actual power in the hands of party bosses, donors, and the media.

    In a nutshell: voting is not an effective substitute for political activity, but too many people think it is. (Which is probably a feature, not a bug, from the perspective of elites.)

    You can read Mary Ward’s arguments against female suffrage for more, but as you can see I think they apply to suffrage generally.

    • Thanks: Chrisnonymous
    • Replies: @dfordoom
  5. Realist says:

    This chart shows how deep the stupidity runs, in this country.

    Our Founding Fathers belief was diametrically opposed to this. Their belief was that only property owning, free, white men of good character…should be able to vote. A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.

    • Agree: Cloudbuster
  6. bro3886 says:

    Australia has mandatory voting, I’m starting to think it would be worth a try. The results would be closer to true populism, for better or worse, assuming they weren’t fraudulent. I don’t think the system could be any worse than what we have now.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @Curle
  7. @bro3886

    …because I definitely want the US to be more like the disarmed, infantilized, tyrannized population that is Australia….

    • Disagree: Curle
    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Bragadocious
  8. Corvinus says:

    “If mass mail-in balloting is now a feature of our electoral landscape–and given the inherent advantages it provides Democrats.”

    AE, you mean inherent advantages regardless of political party it provides to anyone who employs this legitimate way to exercise their franchise.

  9. Corvinus says:
    @Realist

    “Their belief was that only property owning, free, white men of good character…should be able to vote. A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.”

    Arbitrary, to say the least. That’s why Andrew Jackson was immensely popular.

    • Replies: @Realist
  10. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Cloudbuster

    …because I definitely want the US to be more like the disarmed, infantilized, tyrannized population that is Australia….

    Yes, we’re appallingly tyrannised in Australia. It’s exactly like Russia under Stalin. We all live in fear of having the police kick our doors in. Every day the secret police drag thousands of people off to re-education camps. It’s a nightmare.

    We’d love to be more like the US. You have such a wonderfully functional society. Really. You guys have it all figured out.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    , @The Alarmist
  11. Realist says:
    @Corvinus

    Arbitrary, to say the least. That’s why Andrew Jackson was immensely popular.

    Yes, Andrew Jackson was one of the first shitlibs…and the country has gone down hill since.

    • Replies: @Corvinus
  12. Republicans dislike the Republic. Sour grapes, I suppose?

  13. songbird says:

    It is an interesting philosophical question, whether at some future point in time, voting will become mandatory in the US. Mandatory voting is the ultimate in universality.

    I tend to think no – at least on a national level, because it would be too difficult (and somewhat redundant to electoral outcomes) to amend the Constitution. But I bet it appeals to certain people in Congress.

  14. If every person in the country gets a ballot, Trump Republicanism retains an outside chance. Romney Republicanism, though, has not a hope in hell.

    Oh they’ll find a way to fool enough people, A.E. Whether with “national security,” “terrorism,” “freedom from abortion,” or whatever, they will find a way…

    BTW, join SLUG dot com for freedom of whatever.

    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
  15. @dfordoom

    Isn’t it fortunate that you are there and I am here. Keep your ideas there and I’ll keep my ideas here.

    I’m reminded of a quote from the North Korean defector Yeonme Park, “How can we fight for our freedom when we don’t know we are slaves?”

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  16. Corvinus says:
    @Realist

    “Yes, Andrew Jackson was one of the first shitlibs…and the country has gone down hill since.”

    LOL, how easily you get triggered. You do realize he was the original Deplorable, right? And that his efforts expanded the franchise for the common man like yourself, correct?

    And, no, he wasn’t one of the “first shitlibs”. Your historical ignorance even astounds me.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/12/01/is-the-gop-the-party-of-andrew-jackson/?sh=52316eef6aba

  17. Gordo says:

    Even the dead came out to vote for Biden, he’ll be able to thank them soon enough by his looks.

    But no sympathy for Trump, he sh1t all over his own White voters and did everything for Jews and blacks who continued to hate him. He wouldn’t have done any different in a second term.

  18. it goes without saying that felons should be able to vote.

    Depends on what you mean by “felon”. Technically one is a felon, once convicted of a felony, and remains so for life. If an 18 year old gets into a fight; ends up being convicted of battery; does his time as a model prisoner; is released and becomes gainfully employed for 30 years is still a felon at age 60.

    Certainly prisoners should not be allowed to vote, but once the “debt to society” is paid, why not then?

    • Agree: dfordoom
  19. Lulz 😂 … Romney Republicanism. We may as well just chain ourselves and march to the re-education camps.

  20. @dfordoom

    Every day the secret police drag thousands of people off to re-education camps.

    Come on, mate … your overlords aren’t even bothered to use secret police anymore.

    Even Stalin didn’t openly discuss cancelling Christmas.

  21. @Cloudbuster

    Actually it’s Afghans who are tyrannized by Aussies.

    And yet all we hear from Bogans is how they selflessly go to battle “in Yank wars” because they’re so nice and helpful, and how we should thank them whenever we see them. They’re worse than worthless — they’re actually dangerous to allied soldiers of other nations who patrol near them.

  22. Obama used to advise this, Vote vote vote., only he said it a bit differently in order to conform to democratic party methods, “Vote and vote often”….

  23. @Buzz Mohawk

    Join… SLug… dooooooot…. coooooooom…. for… freeeeeeeeedoooooom… … … … of… … … … …

    • Replies: @A123
  24. A123 says:
    @Chrisnonymous

    Slugs have great beach parties… Really… Honest….

    🍻 PARTY ON 🍻

    [MORE]

  25. Curle says:
    @bro3886

    I’ve thought this too. If everyone were required to submit a ballot whether they vote it or not and one could choose a NO VOTE option with the selection publishable to the voter there’d be little excuse for multiple different systems subject to creative abuse. It would create a level playing field between the honest and the dishonest. With no undervotes, votes can’t be created.

    • Replies: @A123
  26. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Barack Obama's secret Unz account

    voting is not an effective substitute for political activity, but too many people think it is.

    I agree entirely.

    If you look at all the examples of significant political change (whether those changes from been positive or negative and most have been negative) not one has been achieved through the ballot box.

    The gains made by the LGBT lobby, the gains made by the feminists, the enormous changes forced by the environmentalist lobby, the civil rights movement, the taking over of foreign policy by the neocons, the rise of neo-liberal economic policy – these changes were not achieved through the ballot box. They were also not achieved by people with guns.

    Political activity is not futile but is it futile if you think that political activity means voting. Effective political activity means people getting off their asses and agitating for what they want.

  27. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Cloudbuster

    Isn’t it fortunate that you are there and I am here.

    It’s certainly fortunate for me. I get to live in a functional society.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
  28. A123 says:
    @Curle

    With no undervotes, votes can’t be created.

    According the DNC, districts with over 100% registration of eligible voters are fine. There have been multiple lawsuits over this, for example:(1)

    Judicial Watch announced today that a September 2020 study revealed that 353 U.S. counties had 1.8 million more registered voters than eligible voting-age citizens. In other words, the registration rates of those counties exceeded 100% of eligible voters. The study found eight states showing state-wide registration rates exceeding 100%: Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

    If more than 100% of the population is voting, universal voting is guaranteed to have over votes.

    The things that would really help:

    -1- Proof of U.S. Citizenship for registration
    -2- In person voting only, except for overseas and true hardship
    -3- Proof of identity for voting / REAL ID compliant

    PEACE 😇
    _______

    (1) https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-releases/new-jw-study-voter-registration/

    • Replies: @Curle
  29. @dfordoom

    You keep lying to yourself like that and your nose will grow huge.

  30. Rosie says:
    @Realist

    A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.

    Then why not use a better measure of intelligence?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @Realist
  31. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Realist

    Our Founding Fathers belief was diametrically opposed to this. Their belief was that only property owning, free, white men of good character…should be able to vote. A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.

    What a great idea. Of course such people today would vote overwhelmingly for neo-liberalism, crony capitalism and globalism. Do you have any more great ideas?

  32. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.

    Then why not use a better measure of intelligence?

    Limiting the vote to high IQ people would mean limiting the vote to people who believe passionately in globalism and Social Justice, and people who believe passionately in crazy environmentalist nonsense.

    It’s high IQ people who got us into the mess we’re in now.

    Some things are so obviously insane that you need a high IQ and a university education to believe them.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund, Rosie
    • Replies: @Bill
    , @Realist
  33. Mark G. says:
    @Realist

    Our Founding Fathers belief was diametrically opposed to this. Their belief was that only property owning, free, white men of good character…should be able to vote. A crude intelligence requirement…to vote.

    The science fiction writer Robert Heinlein once suggested that the vote be limited to people who are able to solve a quadratic equation. If that was put into effect, all of our elected officials would be like your high school math teacher.

    • Replies: @Realist
  34. iffen says:

    The Borg didn’t even have the decency to take a day off before flipping from four years of “Trump’s ruling by dictatorial means and bypassing Congress” to “Biden needs to immediately issue executive orders and not wait on Congress.”

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
  35. I never vote because I know it’s just replacing one warden with another, one mafia family with another. Voting never produces any substantial changes, so why bother. The deep state always gets elected.

    However, for those that want to improve the voting system, there’s a very convenient way to do that.

    Allow Internet retailers to sell, for example, a Trump and a Biden for $1 each. Allow people to vote by purchasing the item of their choice from their retailer of choice. The credit card companies know who everyone is and their records can eliminate duplicate votes and votes by illegals by resolving their records with gov’t records of who is and isn’t a citizen, who is and isn’t of age, etc. The credit card companies can then state how many Trump and Biden items were sold and to whom. The credit card statement is a record of what vote was tallied as an audit trail. The Internet site keeps the $1 as an inducement to cooperate in the effort.

    This eliminated mail in ballots, hacked voting machines, standing in line, weather event interference, exit polling, voter intimidation, etc . Public libraries and retail stores with WiFi can provide Internet access to the public.

    That part of the public that can’t, for whatever reason, take advantage of this scheme can go to the nearest police station to vote using the police to check for qualifications.

    I would hope that some retailers also add the none of the above option for all positions so we might gauge how many people don’t buy into this bullshit system, not because they’re too lazy to vote, but because they don’t agree with the overall concept.

    • Replies: @Glt
  36. Curle says:
    @A123

    If everyone is required to vote the registration process becomes redundant does it not?

    • Replies: @A123
  37. Bill says:
    @dfordoom

    Yep. The current US elite got into Ivy League schools during the height of the IQ fetishist SAT era. What we have right now is what IQ “meritocracy” looks like.

  38. Bill says:

    An interesting hypothetical poll question: What is more important, democracy or good government?

    See, that’s what Crimestop is for: heading off “interesting” poll questions.

  39. A123 says:
    @Curle

    If everyone is required to vote the registration process becomes redundant does it not?

    Only in a crime free society.

    In the U.S., illegal non-citizens routinely use stolen citizen Social Security #’s [SSN] for employment checks. If everyone who presents an SSN can vote, you have over 100% registration.

    There still needs to be a pre-election day validation/registration to distinguish:
    — Citizens required to vote
    — Non-Citizens prohibited from voting

    PEACE 😇

  40. Realist says:
    @Mark G.

    If that was put into effect, all of our elected officials would be like your high school math teacher.

    I don’t follow the logic.

  41. Realist says:
    @Rosie

    Then why not use a better measure of intelligence?

    I’m all for it…anything is better than the current way.

  42. Realist says:
    @dfordoom

    Limiting the vote to high IQ people would mean limiting the vote to people who believe passionately in globalism and Social Justice, and people who believe passionately in crazy environmentalist nonsense.

    What makes you think those people have a high IQ?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  43. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Realist

    Limiting the vote to high IQ people would mean limiting the vote to people who believe passionately in globalism and Social Justice, and people who believe passionately in crazy environmentalist nonsense.

    What makes you think those people have a high IQ?

    I think you may be making the mistaking of assuming that anyone who holds opinions with which you disagree must be dumb. The scary thing about reality is that really smart people often believe really stupid things. They believe really stupid things because being smart they can find ways to rationalise crazy beliefs. Smart people really can convince themselves that a man wearing a frock is exactly the same as a woman. Being smart they can come up with elaborate theories about how gender is just socially constructed.

    • Replies: @Realist
  44. Realist says:
    @dfordoom

    You didn’t answer my question.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  45. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Realist

    You didn’t answer my question.

    I can’t give you IQ test results for every SJW. But it does seem that the crazy SJW beliefs (and extreme globalist and environmentalist beliefs) are significantly more common among the university-educated. One assumes that the university-educated are more likely to be from the higher IQ end of the scale.

    At the very least we can confidently say that the more education a person has the more likely that person is to subscribe to crazy SJW/globalist/environmentalist beliefs.

    Of course we can debate whether it’s the high IQ or the excessive education that is doing the damage.I suspect it’s both.

    • Agree: V. K. Ovelund
    • Replies: @Realist
  46. Realist says:
    @dfordoom

    At the very least we can confidently say that the more education a person has the more likely that person is to subscribe to crazy SJW/globalist/environmentalist beliefs.

    Not all college education is the same. STEM courses require a higher level of IQ.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  47. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Realist

    At the very least we can confidently say that the more education a person has the more likely that person is to subscribe to crazy SJW/globalist/environmentalist beliefs.

    Not all college education is the same. STEM courses require a higher level of IQ.

    True. But even STEM graduates can and often do subscribe to nonsensical ideas, especially nonsensical ideas that are outside their own immediate field of study. Astrophysicists will quickly spot nonsense in the field of astrophysicists but will often swallow ludicrous nonsense about climate change.

    • Replies: @Realist
  48. Glt says:
    @RoatanBill

    Hallo sir. While I agree that this would be a slight bump above the no id status quo, as a casual reader of doctor of credit (I am not a churner or even a hobbyist, in my opinion, but opened half a dozen cards or accounts/yr the last decade) I do not think this would reach the level of in person ID verification even at the $100/vote level.

    If the will for ID checks at the polls is there, it isn’t complex.

    • Replies: @RoatanBill
  49. @Glt

    The number of cards a person has shouldn’t make a difference. They all tie back to an identity and that identity can be checked against various credit card company, bank, tax and other gov’t databases.

    If we can trust the credit card companies to bill us at our address and be the middle man in billions of dollars worth of financial transaction, then I’d like to use that tested and relatively secure mechanism to replace the obviously corrupt voting system. Just the fact that exit polling would be impossible would mean that the MSM couldn’t predict winners and losers to sway voters.

    Out of curiosity, why bother getting numerous cards per year? What’s the benefit to you?

  50. Realist says:
    @dfordoom

    But even STEM graduates can and often do subscribe to nonsensical ideas, especially nonsensical ideas that are outside their own immediate field of study. Astrophysicists will quickly spot nonsense in the field of astrophysicists but will often swallow ludicrous nonsense about climate change.

    That is true. This is a source of consternation for me, since I have a degree in chemistry and physics.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS