The Free Talk Live BBS
Free Talk Live => General => Topic started by: Tom Foppiano on December 23, 2011, 04:34:02 PM
-
I've heard Stephanie and I think Ian say, "If voting worked, it would be illegal."
That doesn't really make sense to me. Lets think of a bunch of things that can help bring about liberty that are not illegal.
Joining the Free State Project
Having pro-liberty radio shows.
Writing pro-liberty books
Porcfest
Podcasts
Protests
Meetings
Websites
All of the above must not work, right?
I am not saying that voting works, but something being legal doesn't preclude it from bringing about more liberty.
"If having liberty loving people move to one state would bring about liberty, it would be illegal."
-
Even voting works. I've seen it happen. Shit, I've helped make it happen.
We got rid of a State Rep who wanted an income tax.
We elected just enough State Senators to reject a seat-belt law.
We elected enough State Reps to repeal all knife laws.
...and so on...
From what I have seen in ~6 years of hardcore NH activism, voting is the one thing that's worked best and most obviously, out of all forms of activism.
-
voting is the one thing that's worked best and most obviously, out of all forms of activism.
Cept of course, chalking the sidewalks.
Nothing beats that.
-
voting is the one thing that's worked best and most obviously, out of all forms of activism.
Cept of course, chalking the sidewalks.
Nothing beats that.
It makes us freer.
-
voting is the one thing that's worked best and most obviously, out of all forms of activism.
Cept of course, chalking the sidewalks.
Nothing beats that.
It makes us freer.
Thats the chalk tycoons telling people that.
Its propoganda.
-
Even voting works. I've seen it happen. Shit, I've helped make it happen.
We got rid of a State Rep who wanted an income tax.
We elected just enough State Senators to reject a seat-belt law.
We elected enough State Reps to repeal all knife laws.
...and so on...
From what I have seen in ~6 years of hardcore NH activism, voting is the one thing that's worked best and most obviously, out of all forms of activism.
I agree that voting can work.
My main point was just that something being legal doesn't make it useless in the quest for human freedom.
The logical consequences of that notion are ridiculous. Its just as silly as saying something like, "An eye for eye makes the world blind."
-
The voter's wishes are routinely ignored in my state of Washington, and I believe the same is true elsewhere. For example, this past election the public overwhelmingly approved ending the state's long monopoly on selling liquor. Now, the state is looking at any way possible to circumvent the voter's decision.
This happens every election. The public passes some initiative, and then the state says something to the effect of, "Oh, well--we'd love to comply. Just LOVE to. But, surely the voters didn't actually intend for this outcome to happen. They're just miffed right now. Yeah, THAT's the ticket! The voters merely wished to send us a message that they want us to do better in the future."
-
The voter's wishes are routinely ignored in my state of Washington, and I believe the same is true elsewhere. For example, this past election the public overwhelmingly approved ending the state's long monopoly on selling liquor. Now, the state is looking at any way possible to circumvent the voter's decision.
This happens every election. The public passes some initiative, and then the state says something to the effect of, "Oh, well--we'd love to comply. Just LOVE to. But, surely the voters didn't actually intend for this outcome to happen. They're just miffed right now. Yeah, THAT's the ticket! The voters merely wished to send us a message that they want us to do better in the future."
I agree with you. But voting can work. It often doesn't, though.
Anyways, the initial point was that the legality of voting has little to do with its ability to promote freedom. Is free talk live not promoting freedom?
-
Joining the Free State Project
Having pro-liberty radio shows.
Writing pro-liberty books
Porcfest
Podcasts
Protests
Meetings
Websites
Governments didn't invent those things specifically to make people feel like they have a say and to busy them with something time-consuming and trivial so that they wouldn't actually pursue means that might have an impact. Whether any of those other things work is up for debate (just as voting is) but there's something to the slogan assuming you don't over-analyze it semantically. And if any particular exercise of a tactic does have a serious impact, I expect them to find a way to justify using violence to stop it, i.e. make it illegal.
-
Governments didn't invent those things specifically to make people feel like they have a say and to busy them with something time-consuming and trivial so that they wouldn't actually pursue means that might have an impact. Whether any of those other things work is up for debate (just as voting is) but there's something to the slogan assuming you don't over-analyze it semantically. And if any particular exercise of a tactic does have a serious impact, I expect them to find a way to justify using violence to stop it, i.e. make it illegal.
I basically agree with you and often wonder if the so called American experiment produced more tyranny than would have existed otherwise. I've been told things like, "We ARE the government," because of the fact that people can vote. So I see your point.
But I don't think I was "over-analyzing it semantically." The voting slogan is very, very clear. Because voting is legal, it must not be effective. And I disagree with that statement.
And the hosts on FTL constantly get involved in semantics. They jump all over things like, "We invaded Iraq." Or, "The citizens need to stand up for their rights."
And Merry Christmas/Buddha/Atheist/Jesus Time. Ho Ho Ho or whatever.
-
And Merry Christmas/Buddha/Atheist/Jesus Time.
personally, I celebrate Isaac Newton's birthday.
25 December 1642
-
The voter's wishes are routinely ignored in my state of Washington, and I believe the same is true elsewhere. For example, this past election the public overwhelmingly approved ending the state's long monopoly on selling liquor. Now, the state is looking at any way possible to circumvent the voter's decision.
This happens every election. The public passes some initiative, and then the state says something to the effect of, "Oh, well--we'd love to comply. Just LOVE to. But, surely the voters didn't actually intend for this outcome to happen. They're just miffed right now. Yeah, THAT's the ticket! The voters merely wished to send us a message that they want us to do better in the future."
True dat. In Colorado, the legislature had done everything they possibly can to make Medical Cannabis go away, even though it's a right for a patient or caregiver to grow, harvest, and exchange it. They were even "thoughtful" enough to make a law telling counties they can zone it out of existence if they like. Two guesses what most counties did. WTF?
-
I've heard Stephanie and I think Ian say, "If voting worked, it would be illegal."
It doesn't just not make sense to you, it doesn't make any sense at all. It is a completely illogical statement of opinion. It is impossible to prove that the statement is true.
In fact, it is easy to prove the statement incorrect. However, I think it is reasonable for a very jaded person to hear the statement, put almost no thought into it, and agree with it. For example, everyone knows that voting works sometimes. However, perhaps someone in their head could think that the statement really means that voting usually doesn't allow people that think just like me to get what I want out of it. Of course, the statement doesn't mean that at all. It doesn't matter what the statement actually means. People are capable of pretending the meaning is whatever they want to justify their nonsensical opinion.
-
My main point was just that something being legal doesn't make it useless in the quest for human freedom.
There is no relation to something being legal and how useful it is in the quest for human freedom. So, yes, I agree with you. I am not sure that voting is even designed as a tool to increase human freedom. It is a true, but is often used to decrease human freedom.
-
personally, I celebrate Isaac Newton's birthday.
25 December 1642
Not me.
Because of that A-Hole, I have to pick up crab apples off my back yard every year.
-
My main point was just that something being legal doesn't make it useless in the quest for human freedom.
There is no relation to something being legal and how useful it is in the quest for human freedom. So, yes, I agree with you. I am not sure that voting is even designed as a tool to increase human freedom. It is a true, but is often used to decrease human freedom.
Absolutely. Voting is more often used to decrease my freedom. But it can be used to increase it.
-
My main point was just that something being legal doesn't make it useless in the quest for human freedom.
There is no relation to something being legal and how useful it is in the quest for human freedom. So, yes, I agree with you. I am not sure that voting is even designed as a tool to increase human freedom. It is a true, but is often used to decrease human freedom.
Absolutely. Voting is more often used to decrease my freedom. But it can be used to increase it.
You bet! I don't vote for people, but I do vote down every initiative and referendum that makes the government larger, more debt driven, and more intrusive. Occasionally, I vote for one that reverses that process (usually constitutional amendments forbidding the legislature to make certain types of laws.)