Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

Is Voting Morally Permissible?

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 11:39:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
...or even intellectually permissible?

REASONS NOT TO VOTE

Morality
1. Non-Aggression - It's not good to have some people ruling others. Free choice beats winner-take-all politics. Individual rights trump "public good."

2. Non-Violence - Political government is collectivized violence. Don't rob your neighbor by proxy. Use peaceful means for all your endeavors.

Individual Rationality
3. Statistical - The probability of casting a deciding vote is miniscule.

4. Rational Ignorance - The cost of information is greater than the expected benefit.

Institutional Analysis
5. Public Choice - Rulers go by what gains them power and pelf, not the 'public good.' They are rent seekers, selling power to cronies.

6. The Public Goods Problem - In a political system, the few big beneficiaries win out over the many marginal losers virtually every time. Good law is a public good so is undersupplied; bad law is a private good so is oversupplied.

7. Bribery/media underdog - The little guy voter can't outbid the munitions and oil industries for political favors or mass media propaganda. We get a dog and pony show with "choice" of statist A or statist B.
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 2:53:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/27/2013 11:39:35 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:


...or even intellectually permissible?

REASONS NOT TO VOTE

Morality
1. Non-Aggression - It's not good to have some people ruling others. Free choice beats winner-take-all politics. Individual rights trump "public good."

Why? Not only is it necessary, I would say it is moral. The public benefit matters more than individuals from an objective and reasoned standpoint.

2. Non-Violence - Political government is collectivized violence. Don't rob your neighbor by proxy. Use peaceful means for all your endeavors.

This sounds remarkably like a case for anarchy. In anarchy, everyone would just kill one another. It would be mass chaos and lawlessness and rampancy everywhere. Hobbes had the correct view of the state of man in nature.

Individual Rationality
3. Statistical - The probability of casting a deciding vote is miniscule.

True.

4. Rational Ignorance - The cost of information is greater than the expected benefit.

I don't know what this is about.

Institutional Analysis
5. Public Choice - Rulers go by what gains them power and pelf, not the 'public good.' They are rent seekers, selling power to cronies.

Not always. And this is best avoided when we have representative rule and outlaw a spoils system.

6. The Public Goods Problem - In a political system, the few big beneficiaries win out over the many marginal losers virtually every time. Good law is a public good so is undersupplied; bad law is a private good so is oversupplied.

Hence the need to remove Citisens United.

7. Bribery/media underdog - The little guy voter can't outbid the munitions and oil industries for political favors or mass media propaganda. We get a dog and pony show with "choice" of statist A or statist B.

Again, hence the need to remove Citisens United. Additionally, the media is only a (highly warped and cracked) mirror of the public.
Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 10:28:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It sounds to me that your promoting anarchy.

You perceive the government or election probably that way but practically, no matter how evil you think the two are, we need them. It's a social contract, otherwise, we will be in a complete chaos.
Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2013 10:53:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/27/2013 10:28:12 PM, Juris wrote:
It sounds to me that your promoting anarchy.

You perceive the government or election probably that way but practically, no matter how evil you think the two are, we need them. It's a social contract, otherwise, we will be in a complete chaos.

Self-correction:

*You're
Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2013 9:28:16 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/27/2013 10:28:12 PM, Juris wrote:
It sounds to me that your promoting anarchy.

You perceive the government or election probably that way but practically, no matter how evil you think the two are, we need them. It's a social contract, otherwise, we will be in a complete chaos.

Explain to me the mechanism between no government and chaos. How does eradicating government induce chaos?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
Juris
Posts: 109
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/31/2013 11:14:50 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/31/2013 9:28:16 PM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
At 12/27/2013 10:28:12 PM, Juris wrote:
It sounds to me that your promoting anarchy.

You perceive the government or election probably that way but practically, no matter how evil you think the two are, we need them. It's a social contract, otherwise, we will be in a complete chaos.

Explain to me the mechanism between no government and chaos. How does eradicating government induce chaos?

Freedom and law are present in anarchy, but force is absent. When the essential element of force is absent, freedoms are absolute and laws are useless. People can do anything they want and there is no limit to it because no group or organization can compel obedience without force. Thinking that mutual agreement by the people is enough to follow orders in the society is erroneous. We have to consider that in anarchy, everyone is equal that no individual should claim power over the other except through power. This means that weak people in anarchy would have no place in the society because only the fittest would rule. Clearly, we need a government because it is where people turn over their rights to be protected and make mutual agreement for order.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2014 2:14:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/27/2013 11:39:35 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:


...or even intellectually permissible?

REASONS NOT TO VOTE

Morality
1. Non-Aggression - It's not good to have some people ruling others. Free choice beats winner-take-all politics. Individual rights trump "public good."

And what's the alternative? Oh, that's right. People dictating the law as regards their property. How'd it become their property again, though? It's either by aggression/force or unanimous decision bro. Stop being dumb. Also, private property has no bounds. It's better to have people ruling themselves as much as possible, rather than have someone else rule them.

2. Non-Violence - Political government is collectivized violence. Don't rob your neighbor by proxy. Use peaceful means for all your endeavors.

Use peaceful means of robbery, LOL.


Individual Rationality
3. Statistical - The probability of casting a deciding vote is miniscule.

And so what you need to do is peacefully destroy your competition. Walk them to their own deaths, say.

4. Rational Ignorance - The cost of information is greater than the expected benefit.

Trust Hitler.


Institutional Analysis
5. Public Choice - Rulers go by what gains them power and pelf, not the 'public good.' They are rent seekers, selling power to cronies.

What do rulers have to do with Democracy? You'd think they'd be more fundamental to private property, retard.

6. The Public Goods Problem - In a political system, the few big beneficiaries win out over the many marginal losers virtually every time. Good law is a public good so is undersupplied; bad law is a private good so is oversupplied.

7. Bribery/media underdog - The little guy voter can't outbid the munitions and oil industries for political favors or mass media propaganda. We get a dog and pony show with "choice" of statist A or statist B.

"Damn those big businesses, they're corrupting our government! What we need to do is get rid of government, because then big business will have no more power over us!"

Dumb. The primary problem here is big business, not government. This is capitalism, retard.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2014 2:18:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
America is more racially tolerant because capitalism, LOL. WSA, you've got to be one of the stupidest posters on here.