Sunday, May 27, 2012

Definition:Libertarian Voting

Voting: the act of participating in a government sponsored election in the hope that the least criminal of two criminals will get elected and result in the criminal spending part of his time in office advancing your freedom.


  1. Choosing the lesser of 2 evils is still choosing evil.

  2. We can read and write all we want about the moral virtues of liberty and the moral reprehensibility of statism and educate fellow slaves to hasten the coming day of liberation but we all know that is several generations away. I see our situation as that of an occupied land. Like the French Underground (hereinafter FU), we are enemies of the regime and, in their eyes, subversives. Sometimes the FU members even had to wear Nazi uniforms and hold positions in the Nazi regime to be effective in their efforts of subversion. They could relay important info on supply trains so they could be derailed and blown up. They could get travel papers and other documents so that FU forgers could use them to get high profile dissidents out of the country. But the main point is that sometimes we need to “blend in” in order to be more effective in our efforts to liberate our fellow slaves. And liberation is what it is about isn’t it?

    Thus, in this manner, I see no problem voting and advancing TRUE members of the "underground liberation front" to positions of office and even to wear Nazi, er, gov't costumes, and draw paychecks from the regime if, and ONLY if, their efforts are entirely devoted to reducing the size, scope, power, funding of gov't. And if they manage to toss a few banksters and fraudsters in the pokey, well that is all the better. I can dream about Cheney Paulson, Geithner etc. on trial can't I? (for Cheney only non-stop indefinite enhanced waterboarding will do)

    Long live the underground! Viva subvercion!

  3. From a Scripps Howard piece on Obama/Romney. Frankly, it's bizarre:

    "As the country eventually comes to terms with the foreclosure crisis, high-interest personal credit card debt and the insecurity of its long-term nest eggs in 401(k)s, some experts suggest financial regulation based on behavioral research is in order. Critics contend that's a "nanny state" approach.

    Professor Michael S. Barr, of the University of Michigan Law School, author of the just published "No Slack: The Financial Lives of Low-Income Americans" and a former Obama Treasury official, said that regulations should be based on "how people actually think and behave as opposed to some policy makers' abstract model about how that occurs."

    "No Slack" suggests fairness may require protecting consumers from what they think they want but can't in fact afford."

  4. Lysander Spooner's take on voting:
    In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, even for the time being. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having ever been asked, a [*6] man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practise this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, be finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man attempts to take the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the ballot --- which is a mere substitute for a bullet --- because, as his only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency, into which he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of self-defence offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him.
    -No Treason No. 2

  5. Jeff hits the nail on the head:

    "The fiction part is the deception. It works only so long as the social consensus is there to support it. The task of anyone who opposes the great conspiracy, then, is to reveal and expose the reality that is being covered up by all the stories of all the wonderful things that government does. The fiction is unsustainable in light of logic and evidence. The curtain must be pulled back."

    Libertarians who vote, help hold up the curtain.