Budding self-described anarchist here.

I don't really have any free time at the moment, but to briefly add to the conversation: in my own opinion saying that one is unaffected by or plays no part in the political process is like saying that one plays no role in the effects of gravity simply because they choose not to pay attention to it. Like gravity, politics shape the world we live in and the experiences we all have every single day. You might not like politics but to say that they hold no bearing in your life seems pretty silly to me...unless you grew up on Mars, you are affected by the sociopolitical realities of Earth. Claiming ignorance, disinterest, or shame doesn't exclude you from the club.

Just my own opinion

^ Pretty much all of this is my take as well. Yes I vote, but I also participate by signing petitions. I have even made the occasional city hall meeting. But ultimately I try to spend little time thinking or talking about politics.. it's too polarizing for people. Instead I like to engage people in actual issues...

I can feel sympathy for each, and by running other thoughts having disagreement for each.


Only my personal situation could force a choice.
Ideologically: feeling a victim of contradicting arguments.

Another excellent endlessness post. That pretty much sums up the ineffective waste that is considered politics in the media.

Also, what Jees wrote above. If I were to participate in it at all, my decisions would be tragically altered and shaped by my immediate needs and my living situation, if there were any situation to speak of. Highest ideals and visions for humanity would take back seat. Well no, more like the trunk...

Another interesting question raised is anarchy. I didn't think there would be so many self described anarchists here. What would that look like, really?

.. It is my opinion that anarchy in practice wouldn't look like anything.. because that is already what is essentially in effect.
Anarchism too is another part of the scam, the evil, societies bum leg. It is sheer sentimentalism.. edgy language describing an ideal that will never be realized because it is in actuality a description of what we already have. A systemless jumble of chaos, with bits and pieces floating around. Aggregates of likeminded people, composites of collective disorder. Another sprig of hook-up culture, an art community, neo-hippies, collectivism, obscuritanism, individualism, sensationalism.

We are every one of us busting our ass trying to stay alive. And a good number of us are fed up. we lose it and start getting big ideas about how the world is. It's this, it's that, and here is how it should be. And that's all.

My views are inconsistent, range widely and are sometimes borderline irresponsible. I live in the U.S. so I am SO TIRED OF SOCKPUPPET POLITICS I COULD JUST MESS MYSELF every time I see some politician utter the phrase "The American People".

I'm Libertarian to the point of wondering whatever happened to the Constitutional Guarantee of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, and I think all drugs should be legalized (Popular enough notion on this site, but sounds crazy to most people where I live).

I'm Liberal enough to wonder why we can't all just get along.

I'm Conservative enough to not support the Gubbamint using other people's money to perpetuate poverty with well meaning but poorly implemented social programs.

I believe everyone deserves a government it can trust. I also believe government's job is to maintain a level playing field for everyone.

Anarchy? Too many idiots exist. Sounds like it would mostly benefit the young, fast, vicious and those with nothing to lose. Not buying into that.

I absolutely love the reasoning behind this view, but I question how realistic it is for the majority of Americans. I am privileged in that I can pretty much do and think as I please, but then again my interests don't involve hurting people (at least not directly, as my usage of scarce materials could arguably be inefficient and thus hurting humanity).

So regardless of the law I use drugs, but again I do them usually in the privacy of my own home and to expand my mind. But the issue with not voting comes into the fact that I as an individual am not going to change the system, and if I have this mentality, then the majority of American people will definitely share a similar one.

What I'm trying to say is that regardless of if I vote or not, someone is getting elected and will "rule over" me. While that sounds bad, it's just the way it is, and I'm pretty happy right now, especially being aware of this.

So if someone is going to rule over you politically anyway, wouldn't you rather have a say in it, and then simply just look for opportunities in the future to dismantle the current system?

With regard to the original question, I would probably be classified by others as a democrat with socialistic tendencies (although an anarchist with regard to 'moral' issues). When I do vote, I vote democratic and liberally. I'm very liberal on social issues and believe the government needs to play a role in regulating economics/corporations. I am not a fan of money in politics and believe there should be legal limits. But I also feel the government should play no role at all in things like abortion, marriage (I am in favor of polygamous arrangements should the individuals consent), drugs (of course!), suicide, and euthanasia.

---

But there are certain inherent issues with all of the choices above (also there is a difference between systems of government and political parties, but for now I'll just assume that the end goal of the parties, at least in the US, is a slightly altered system of government):

Republican - Focus is on ego/monetary gain and conserving outdated traditional values that prevent freedom. Favors the wealthy, white owners of capital.

Democrat - What if the majority chooses to abuse a minority that doesn't deserve it? What if the majority is not intelligent or easily manipulated? I do not have much faith in "the wisdom of the crowds" as a lot of people are animals at heart.

Libertarian - If you think the government is evil, disorganized, and too heavily influenced by money, then just wait until the corporations have control. I know libertarians are quick to cite the pros of the "free market system," but what happens when the most economical choice is to pollute a nature reserve with carcinogens or cut off electricity to entire lower class neighborhoods? As much as I like capitalism and believe in its ability to change the world for the better, we still need some kind of watchdog for when money becomes more valuable than the human experience.

Socialist - Really this is one of the best ones in my opinion, and some of the nicest countries in the world have socialist setups. I like systems in which it is easy to be middle-class (read: comfortable) and hard to be poor or rich. However, bureaucracy is a big problem here, along with what increasing populations, such as from mass immigration, can do to the system.

Communist - Huge implementation issues, system seems too contrary to human nature to be fairly implemented. Too much power consolidation and corruption in higher levels, and too much governmental control in person lives (like censorship, consider the mass censors in both the USSR and China).

Anarchist - Pretty much the same arguments as for Libertarians above, but I think there is too much of a criminal element currently embedded in humans to handle such freedom. If anarchy was so great, why did humans establish civilization and order in the first place?

---

Many of the problems above come from economics, which is based on scarcity. We only have so many resources, so politics mostly comes down to asking "how are we going to choose who will tell us how to distribute our scarce amount of resources?"

I would hope that as technology exponentially improves, we will be able to optimize our resource consumption, and the Internet as well as legalized psychedelics will give everyone the cognitive liberty needed to move us into a Utopian age. Maybe at this point, when we no longer need to compete, true anarcho-capitalism will serve us well. But until then, to avoid mass resource consolidation due to power vacuums, it appears that we need some kind of order imposed upon us.

What many people fail to realize is that voting, or participating in the political system in any real manner, is allowing things to carry on as they are. The democratic system gives the illusion of importance to the voter. If the system worked as it should, yes, voting would make a difference. But then you could say a lot of nice things about Communism as well, if it worked as it should

I have never, nor will I ever, willing participate in politics. (aside from this thread)


I simply see voting as probably the least efficient method of change, as endlessness also stated. There are many other avenues of change that, to me, seem much more powerful.

If you continue that mentality, that you will always be ruled over, then it only perpetuates the corrupt system. Allowing yourself to be defeated in that manner then promotes you to participate in the system, as you see that as your only method of affecting change. Which is illusory.

We all need to focus on the present, not the future, to find methods of dismantling the current system. I feel non-participation and the promotion of that idea is probably the first step, and the least violent.

I agree; voting is not a very efficient method. If I want change in the world, I'd rather mobilize (or have my friends/peers mobilize) and get it done myself. Or I will just live my life differently, promoting a different way of handling issues. These are better options than simply electing someone else and trusting that this person will do it.

But let's say that next week a ballot comes up in your town for the legalization of marijuana, as it did in my hometown about a year ago. You know all the old conservative types are going to vote against it, so would or wouldn't you vote for legalization?

I understand that the government should not have a say in it at all, but at the end of the day it does right now. And I do not like it when innocent people are imprisoned for an offense like possession of marijuana. So in that election in my hometown I made it a point to go out and vote for legalization. It won.

Changing the world ourselves and voting don't have to be mutually exclusive. While it's not efficient, it's how powerful people get elected and laws are passed right now, whether we like it or not. Why not mobilize and work to get things you want to see on the ballot, then everyone can vote on it?

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth too, and hopefully we don't need to rely on voting as much in the future. But how else can we reconcile having so many different groups with such different views? We also need to keep in mind that we might not be right. What if our beliefs aren't the best for everyone, and we ourselves are disillusioned? We cannot go around enforcing our ideologies on others just as we wouldn't want others to do to us.

So if the choices affecting everyone aren't made by voting or those in power, then who should make them? And here this is basically just asking which political system is the best, in different words.

I just wanted to tie these points together.

Keeping this as short as possible, I'm not politically savvy and 6 months ago I had no idea who Jeremy Corbyn was. My understanding of the man is that he was an activist first and politics came shortly afterwards, he cared he hung in the game long enough, now he's getting noticed and I think his finger is firmly on the pulse of what is happening in regard to the disproportionate distribution of resources. In a fair world with an honest media I believe he would become prime minister and make a positive change.

I have a glimmer of hope in that the spread of information is becoming more free rather than the stone wall dictatorship of what is classic news media moguls who in essence are in control.

Like our nervous system, our politics needs to evolve and I certainly won't be throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Oh and socialism... Obviously.

Together
Everyone
Achieves
More

what did Churchhill say, that we have the worst form of government, except for all the other ones? (and no U.S. politician would ever say something like that!) After packing on a few years, I'm inclined to believe him now. Pretty sad, given the potential of humanity, that we end up with some self-lotathing Lowest Common Denominator, or a bunch of crooks ... or both.

**patiently waits for machine overlords**

I see a lot of folks here saying "I don't vote, it's pointless/hypocritical, there are other, better forms of engagement," and as an activist I largely agree, direct action is a far superior tactic than waiting every 2 or 4 years to vote (just look at how effective the Black Lives Matter movement was at getting Bernie Sanders to develop a racial justice platform), but whenever I hear people say the things that are getting said in this thread, I always have to wonder:

What are you doing instead of voting? Is there some other work you are doing to bring change about in the world? Thinking the 'right' thoughts doesn't count for much if that's all you're doing.

Blessings
~ND

Taking care of number one, obviously. And building trust and support systems with people that matter to me.

Change starts in your heart and grows from the ground up. and of course guns are necessary for protection from anyone who doesn't vibe with that.

KIKKER-IZM

I think that by opting out of voting you are involving yourself in politics. Your decision to not participate affects the democratic process. For example, i am pretty sure that you are Canadian but if you were American and your decision to not vote meant that Donald Trump would stand a better chance to get in??? Come on !!!! Its a no brainer! (unless you were actually going to vote for Trump ).

I really do understand that the idea of not getting involved in voting is appealing but maybe i have a different view as, in the country of my birth, it looks like we may actually have a decent alternative (fingers crossed).



Me too.



I wonder that too.



Yep. Get tooled up and massacre those have differing political ideals. You must be an American!

Voting with your dollar is effective on a personal level in the US, quite possibly more effective than voting with your vote. It's also much, much harder to do and maintain, especially on a budget. For instance, don't like companies like WalMart subsidizing their overhead through tax dollars by paying their employees low enough wages that they qualify for $400 million per year in food stamps, medicaid, etc., don't shop there. Don't want to support businesses like Chic-Fil-A that openly make anti-gay comments, no more chicken sandwiches from there.

That being said, I do vote, mainly because I live in a swing state. In local elections, we went from having a Democrat governor and Republican state house and senate to all three branches Republican, and now it's illegal to ask what chemicals are being pumped into the ground in fracking.

I didn't vote in the poll in the thread because I consider myself to be a liberal with socialist leanings, to the extent that I consider politics at all, which results in my voting Democrat. I am not a Democrat.

You will probably get a lot of flak for this point of view here, but to me this makes a lot of sense.



I don't think that's what thymani was saying at all.

See, this is the problem with political debates- people get so attached to their point of view that it distorts and/or prevents them from seeing other perspectives. When you're not so attached, you can see good points on both sides of the issue. It's all relative anyway.

If only it was a democracy.. More like a polito-corporatecracy.



I dont see how that kind of comment helps the general atmosphere and the discussion.

Ok i am sorry, It was a joke and i apologise to my american brothers and sisters if it caused offence. But there was a part of me that thought that Thymani was making an ironic comment about gun culture,the climate of fear and the need to protect ourselves with extreme prejudice to any threats to our way of life. Isn"t that how Bush sold the invasion of Iraq to the American people?
I will butt out and cease any further derailment. Although i don"t know whether it is possible to derail a thread on politics. Isn"t everything in our lives connected to politics in one way or another?



That may be the case but it doesn"t change the fact that by choosing to opt out you have an influence on who gets voted for and who doesn"t.

You read me right, it was somewhat tongue in cheek, because I am an American and I've never been anywhere else. Why not act the part and represent a little?
But at the same time seriously.. concerning those who would force their beliefs, those that believe that they know what is best for me, it is for that particular race of people (they spring from every creed and nation) from whom we necessarily anchor ourselves.. with weapons.