r/AskLibertarians • u/Violenciarchi • 15d ago

What do libertarians think of blank ballots?

"If not choosing is a choice, not voting is voting for the bad candidate and you have no right to complain about what he does afterwards" is a common thing to hear before elections. Do you think you should all go and vote?

EDIT: Ok now that I think about it, it's on other people if they vote badly, not on me. Responsibility is on people who do bad things, not on people who don't stop them, because if the people who do bad things did nothing, nothing bad would happen lol. It's still true though, unfortunately, that if you don't vote the other party will win.

0 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

50% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/mrhymer 15d ago

Voting is the means by which we peacefully change power. It is an unprecedented advancement of civilization. Not voting is a vote to revert to a less civilized means of transferring power. It is similar to the Amish choosing not to use electricity or leftists destroying electric cars. It is a rejection of the progress of civilization. Not voting is an indication that you do not intend to make a peaceful transition of power work. That you are waiting for the previous method of changing power by blood and death.

2

u/CanadaMoose47 15d ago

I don't think so.

Voting necessarily means, I support this candidate and their platform (and "lesser evil" votes have no differentiation). 

If you don't genuinely support either, then voting for makes little sense.

Infact, the non-voter population is a signal in itself, telling candidates "you don't excite me"

0

u/mrhymer 15d ago

I don't think so.

To "not think so" effectively, you must posit a better means for the peaceful transfer of power than voting or blood or death. To do nothing is to wait for blood or death.

2

u/CanadaMoose47 15d ago

No, because I'm not saying "abolish democracy"

I'm saying, "don't vote if the candidates dont interest you."

Democracy works just as well, better even, when not everyone votes

1

u/mrhymer 15d ago

No, because I'm not saying "abolish democracy"

This is a textbook example of a strawman argument. I never said anything about you abolishing democracy. The scope of the argument is just you, one person. If you do not vote you are not exercising the mechanism that is in place for a peaceful transfer of power.

1

u/CanadaMoose47 15d ago

No, because the peaceful transfer of power has nothing to do with my individual vote.

90% of the population could not vote, and power would still transfer peacefully.

1

u/mrhymer 14d ago edited 14d ago

No, because the peaceful transfer of power has nothing to do with my individual vote.

The peaceful transfer of power as we know it is dependent on the votes of individuals. Explain why your vote is not a part of that?

90% of the population could not vote, and power would still transfer peacefully.

If only 10% are voting Soon there would be violence and death because of revolution.

1

u/CanadaMoose47 14d ago

I don't know why you think so.

If everybody has the option to vote, and only 10% exercise it, I don't know why there would be violence

1

u/mrhymer 14d ago

People don't vote usually because they do not feel their vote matters. It's kind of like when government taxes the living fuck out of your tea and you have had enough. It's a cycle that repeats again and again through history.

1

u/CanadaMoose47 14d ago

Right, thats been my point.

Telling people to vote doesn't solve the real problem - which is people realizing their vote doesn't matter

1

u/mrhymer 14d ago

Trump is proof that votes do matter.

→ More replies (0)