A note to my progressive non-voting pals in Colorado
[And if you are not a progressive pal in Colorado, feel free to still read this, but I'm not interested in having a conversation with anyone else. Your comments will be ignored and/or deleted.]
A startling number of my progressive friends have told me that they’re not going to vote in the upcoming election because it’s ‘the same corporate puppet either way’ or that they simply don’t agree with the current two-party system. Which is totally within your rights to do whatever you wish with your vote.
But let me offer this: I’m an economic egalitarian anarchist, and I’ll be voting for Obama. Why? Because you only have two choices for President in the current system, and one of these guys will be President. Abstaining from the vote because you don’t agree with the two-party system is not a vote for a different system. The government could give a shit about non-voters. They never look at voter turnout and think, “oh what can we do to get more people to vote?” Your voice is 100% unheard.
If you want to change the two-party system, you have to put in work outside of your votes. You have to work in your government at a local level and try to elect people on the very ground floor who will affect change in life. I’ll never see healthy anarchy in my lifetime, but I can try to use what democratic power I have to plant seeds now for the future. Plenty of people are blabbing about how they aren’t voting now, but what the fuck were you doing in January to change anything? Two years ago? Simply not voting changes NOTHING.
If your reasons for not voting are that it’s ‘choosing between Coke and Pepsi’, I would point out that might be true if Coke wanted to set women’s reproductive rights back 50 years, and send gay people forcibly back to the closet. Do I think Barack Obama is some magical President? No, I do not. But I do know that at the very least he respects women’s rights and is far more pro-gay than Romney, who could safely be referred to as ‘anti-gay’.
So as a non-voter, ask yourself, is it a little too convenient to not consider my neighbor’s very basic civil rights because of my own political ideals? A lot of these non-voters are straight white males, and I don’t think this is a coincidence at all. Because the possible shitstorm on the horizon isn’t heading for you.
Is voting for Obama choosing ‘the lesser of two evils’? Sure. SO WHY NOT CHOOSE THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS. One of those ‘evils’ will be making very important decisions for the next four years. If you sit out this vote, and Romney is elected, whatever restrictive laws are passed are just as much on your head as every person who actively votes for him.
A lot of people disagree with Obama’s use of drone strike warfare. Okay, but do you think Romney is not going to use violent action against other countries? Do you think he’ll use his zealous religious background to broker peace across the globe? Really?
Colorado is a swing state in a huge way, and this election is going to be incredibly close. So I will ask you, my non-voting, progressive friends: Why not use what democratic voice you have to set up future positive, progressive choices? Why not use your democratic voice to defend the civil rights of women and gay people, instead of giving them over wholesale to faith-based decision-making?
Because your non-vote doesn’t mean shit.
First of all, and with respect: USING ALL CAPS DOESN’T MAKE YOU RIGHT.
Second, the underlying assumption of this piece seems to be that voting is the only or best way to make a difference. If my only response to our current dystopian, oligarchical, plutocratic police state was to not vote, I’d agree I probably wouldn’t have too good a shot at being a Great Man of History. But a non-voter can still do plenty–demonstrate, protest, spread knowledge, etc. Many people have radically altered the course of history by doing things like sitting down in chairs where they weren’t allowed, fasting or simply speaking to a lot of people. Some people have made a major impact when they weren’t even legally allowed to vote. Votes can change the world, but so can simple words and actions. When even Obama voters like yourself admit they are voting for evil (albeit an allegedly “lesser” one), it would appear action and words have a much better chance of saving civilization than your adorable little vote. If you want to support Obama because you at least want to live in a rigged economy where incest victims can choose and stem cell research is legal, I understand completely. However, you have to admit you are supporting a system you admit is evil (although only in a vague rhetorical throat-clearing before you got to the real issues) based almost entirely on a hypothetical scenario. Both parties are sickeningly adept at whipping their constituents into a frenzy with hypotheticals–meanwhile the actual reality transpiring before our eyes is all but ignored. The rampant corruption in which both parties are complicit is quite conveniently never even on the table as an issue because we are so busy discussing what might happen if either party actually lived up to its rhetoric. By trying to make your straight white male progressive friends feel guilty for not having melanin and ovaries, you are only participating in the hypocritical demagoguery both parties use to stay in power. You are only an economic egalitarian anarchist in theory as long as you support such a status quo with such condescending complacency, just as your vote only makes a difference in theory as long it is based entirely on a hypothetical scenario. I prefer to pay close attention to what is actually going on–corporate greed and malfeasance, police corruption and brutality, the erosion of various workers’ rights, the failed and racist war on drugs, etc. and combat the evils I abhor with activism of various sorts. You may think your vote is doing more to save the world, but we will have to let history be the judge.
1. My use of all caps was merely for emphasis. Of course I currently think my opinion is right. Should I write a blog about how my opinion is wrong?
2. The underlying assumption of this piece is decidedly NOT that voting is the only way to make a difference. Only that in a swing state, in a closely contested vote, an abstained vote would only help the candidate who is clearly making right wing, faith-based decisions. As I clearly pointed out, there are many better ways to change the system if you don’t like it. Not voting is not a way to change the system. No one comes around to ask why people didn’t vote. The people in power definitely DON’T CARE (there’s that emphasis again) about why you are not voting.
3. I put evil in quotes because I don’t believe in the concept of ‘evil’, only choices I agree with and choices I don’t agree with. Do I agree with drone warfare, illegal wars, and appointing Monsanto foods goons to federal posts? Of course not. But the bottom line is simply this: Romney has clearly stated his position as a pro-life, anti-gay politician. He would do everything in his considerable power to restrict the freedom of others, and even set the table (through judge appointments) for that oppression to continue in the future. I’m not some idealistic Obama voter, I’m voting for the candidate who won’t actively oppress women and gay people. That’s it, bottom line.
4. Of course you take umbrage to me calling straight white people out, because you are one (judging by your email address). I have yet to hear from a non-voting minority, woman, or queer person. So yes, I am asking you to think outside of your own position of privilege and think about how others might be affected by your choice.
5. By all means, be active. Protest every day until your voice is gone. Go to jail for your beliefs. But why not do the smallest thing, and use the one vote you have to defend (IF NOTHING ELSE) the civil rights of others.
Thanks for commenting!
Okay then, I’ll now use caps for emphasis (but only once so it doesn’t get tiresome):
WHERE exactly did you clearly point out the better ways of changing the system? You said something about working outside your vote, but the very next line says this work should be to get people (ie politicians) elected. You made absolutely no mention of non-partisan activism.
