They're not voting because...
- Voting cannot be morally justified
If you voted, you have wasted time and effort that morally should have been spent on doing something more relevant and effective.
I did not vote because ... of Whitehall Mandarins. The "Sir Humphreys", the unelected civil servants, diplomats, military and intelligence personnel. The unelected Lords and Bishops, the unelected Privy Council, the QANGOs, the lobbyists, the protest and pressure groups, the manipulation and misdirection of the media, the undemocratic compilation of manifestos, the polls and their manipulation, tactical voting, apathy, people who vote the same as their parents or husbands or from a sense of loyalty or pride or some other ridiculous notion, people who vote by post from abroad, no-one understands how Westminster ministers work in the context of European elections, local council elections, and assemblies/ parliaments, (and so forth)... basically because in the broader context, the public vote plays a very insignificant, inefficient and ineffective part in it all!
Our individual and collective influence is well down the list... and it doesn't need a mathematician to work out that the time saved in not voting, not flowing the election, and paying zero attention to politics can be spent more advantageously attending to matters over which we can assert a great influence, control and have a real, significant and evident effect.written 9th May 2005
John replies: so, what exactly did you do that was more "relevant and effective" instead of voting? Talking loudly about moral is one thing but doing something is another.written 10th May 2005
dcd replies: John, you seem to have missed my point (I accept responsibility for poor communication).
Almost anything done instead of voting is more moral (does that help?).
Imagine, if you will (for the sake of the argument) two polar-opposite areas: an area in which you exert no influence and have no control, and an area where you have strong influence and control.
If you choose to spend/ expend time and energy in trying to exert influence or control in the first area, perhaps because you believe you SHOULD have some influence or you have some need to feel your life is having a broad effect on history or the world (etc)....
...then two things are the effect: First, you will fail, and be frustrated. This makes for an unhappy life, and you will end up spreading unhappiness instead of exerting a positive influence (i.e. it is counter-productive). You may become depressed or ill, angry -- maybe even turn into a terrorist, freedom fighter, martyr or suicide bomber. Who knows. The trick is not to set out down that road to a porr quality life.
The second effect comes from the universal law that you have to give up something to get something else. So by occupying yourself in the first area, you DENY applying yourself to the second area.
This means that you are denying your positive influence and control where it is needed most BECAUSE you are wasting your time and energy on lost causes in the first area.
It's about recognising where to apply yourself to greatest effect.
If you can teach a child to read, visit someone in hospital, cut a neighbour's grass, help a family member, then your life will have a great impact. Your influence and control will be used wisely and profitably -- and effectively.
If you decided INSTEAD to vote, then you have to conclude that you have chosen badly from a moral standpoint.
You asked exactly what I did instead of voting... well I worked -- this produces a positive end in many ways, not least of all because it earns me money which I can use for my family's present and future needs and comforts.
Then I spent quality time with my family.
As far as I am concerned, had I taken the time to attend the meetings, study the manifestos and then to vote, it would have been time stolen from where it is most needed and effective.
My decision not to vote was therefore the moral decision.written 11th May 2005
Jo McDonagh replies: My response to everybody who didn't vote is that you should be disgusted with yourselves. For years, people fought to get universal suffrage so that we could all have a say in how our country is run & live in a democracy.
If you really are that unhappy with the political system and don't think there's a party that can represent you, spoil your ballot paper. That way - you've let your voice be heard, but don't stay at home; its wrong on so many different levels.
In response with regards to the amount of time saved by not voting: it takes less than a minute to mark your cross on the ballot paper or to spoil it. Crikey, the polls open at 7am; you can vote / spoil your ballot paper enroute to where ever it is you're going to, the same goes for end of the day - you can vote on your way home. No excuse!written 11th May 2005
Tiger43 replies: To Jo McDonagh..........here here and rollicking good hoorar. In other words, I agree.written 11th May 2005
dcd replies: "For years, people fought to get universal suffrage so that we could all have a say in how our country is run & live in a democracy."
So, tell me, where did it all go wrong?
If what you state is "true", then we should be disgusted with ourselves for letting it get into the state is has become... have their lives been in vain?
I urge you all never to vote, refuse to participate in the corruption of something people fought and died for. It is the only way.
If no-one voted, the system would be proved to be redundant, and "something would have to be done".
Perhaps then we could get a better, cheaper, fairer, smaller and more appropriate democratic voting system -- the sort that those who fought and died deserve.
We could dedicate it to them, in recognition of what they have done, it would be the realisation of their goal.
To spoil a ballot paper is to support the present bastardised system, it gives credence to it, it condones what is has become and denies what it could become.
It is extremely unlikely that enough people will be motivated enough to rise up and overthrow the system, so THIS IS OUR ONLY CHANCE... the apathetic and the protestor together -- we CAN get this sorted as long as we do not allow ourselves to be duped and sucked into voting or spoiling.
STAY AWAY FROM THE BALLOT BOXES.
When you have a system that provides you with some influence, some control, then it becomes the MORAL CHOICE.written 13th May 2005
Jo McDonagh replies: dcd:
I have never heard so much twaddle in my life! If it's that bad get off your backside, stand to become an MP in the next election and do something about it rather than harping on about morality. Engage in politics rather than reject it.
"If no-one voted, the system would be proved to be redundant, and "something would have to be done"." - This just sounds lazy to me; reform society by doing nothing, what a load of rubbish! I don't know if you realise this but you don't get anywhere in this world by doing nothing.
What you have said has made me so cross that I'm not even gonna give you the satisfaction of rising to the bait any further. Good luck staying home and over throwing the system - I can't wait to see how you do it!written 13th May 2005
dcd replies: Your response Jo McDonagh, shows that you have lost the argument.
Perhaps one day you will be able to accept that your views may not be right, or even that there may be several right views.written 14th May 2005
Tiger43 replies: To Jo.........Go for it Jo, tell dcd just what you think. Use your feminine wilds. He won`t be able to counter that.written 18th May 2005
dcd replies: To Tiger43: maybe I should use MY "feminine Wilds" too? Why do you think I am a "He"?????written 18th May 2005
Tiger43 replies: To dcd........Oh, sorry about that, I beg your forgivness in assuming your gender as male. I hope you can find it in your heart, a womans heart to allow for the weakness that a man can sometimes show.
While your`e forgiving me, get your coat, youv`e pulled.written 19th May 2005