The Value, nay, Necessity of Voting Other Party
I often get into this argument about voting, what others call, third party. The general argument that is presented is that in order to make a difference one is simply wasting their vote if they vote for any other contender than the two individuals standing for the two so-called opposite parties. If, for example the voter is a communist they are best to side with the democrat, because at least some of their views are reflected and some of their hopes and opinions for the future are going to make it and, god willing, sometime in the glorious unfurled future of mankind all of the communist’s views will eventually climb from the shadows and bask in the wondrous sunshine.
But that’s just pie in the sky hogwash and worse, leaves the values and opinions of the so-called voter to not only others, but those possible beings years from now. Talk about a cop-out and leaving the weight of ones life on the shoulders of your children. Isn't it bad enough we leave them with our debt?
Those then argue that a vote for this imaginary third party is a wasted vote, like some kind of scrap of trash that no one will care about, no one will read about, no one will bother to even notice, except maybe some nerdy statistician or some future historian. Wasted? Meaning what? That I'm not important?
I have three points I make when I get into this argument.
There is no such thing as a third party.
Aug 28, 1963 Martin Luther King Jr., stood at the Lincoln Memorial and tried, desperately, to finally and for all time destroy the myth of minority. He tried to eliminate the presupposition that there were any real or arbitrary distinction that raised some and thus lowered other individuals in social strata. During his life he continually reminded people that we were equal -- none greater, none congregated by our skin or wealth -- by our humanity. Judged by the content of our characters he said. He was murdered, and like all men martyred, his message got lost in the men that would take up his flag and carry it on.
Now, if we are equal, you and I. Same value of existence. Same access to nature and natural rights (Life, Liberty, Estate) and under the same aspect of creation (that is we exist; how we got from non-existence to existence is a matter of religion and outside the scope of this paper). Then by simple deduction, our values are equal amongst themselves, regardless of our opinion of other peoples values. They merit a level of equality. This means, that whatever your opinion it is the ‘first’ opinion and whatever my opinion, it is the ‘first’ opinion. Since two different values cannot be equal to each other (e.g. 1 ≠ 2) then logically, our opinions must be made of the same underlying nature. That is, we as individuals make them and therefore, they are in a sense our existence.
Because of this, each person, not political party, is a unique fingerprint of thought that escorts a collective thought and works with other individuals to achieve goals. This means that all views, are equal and of similar value to each other. Even those I disagree with have merit as thought and demand a few moments of equal processing time to validate or invalidate. In other words, all political parties, made of unique individuals are equal to each other and by that nature are the First party. All parties are the highest singularity of themselves. Only narrow minded men would dare to demonize other people’s opinions with such outmoded childish thinking as to call a dissenting view ‘third’ and thus, like the proverbial third child, not of the same value as the first.
What’s worse is that the obvious demoralization intended by calling the parties that contain fewer members ‘third’ is lost on those individuals that seem to think themselves morally superior. Unable able to see the forest for the trees. In the end, whatever view point one person has, is the “First point” and thus, the First Party.
I remember reading a story where Nazi’s rounded up thousands of people and marched them out of a city. Once outside the city they were told to strip naked, which they did and lie down in this large hole that had been dug. There, they were systematically shot. First by machine gun fire, then to ensure they were dead, one at time with a bullet to the back of the neck. How is this possible? How exactly does one person just get in a line, follow a group, get naked, and then allow themselves to be executed? Where did the individual go? Where did the process of personal thought, the idea of self, and more importantly, the integrity of individual desire retreat to? I’m no racist, or eugenicist, so I must assume, must, that these were all intelligent people whom wanted to live long and productive lives and that when faced with the possibility of sacrificing that life at the whim of another, there would be at least a few that would fight.
When I vote, I do not simply vote for the guy most likely to win. I do not vote for the guy who appeals to the masses. I do not vote for the underdog, or the guy whom would make a great leader. I vote my Morality. What this means is that when I go to the polls I have taken the time to find out whom the individuals are and I vote for people that agree with my view. I don’t vote for the guy whom sort of agrees with me on one subject and totally disagrees with me on the other. This is absurd. That is like trying to drive a car with two steering wheels, both trying to go in different directions. In the end, such a car either crashes, or is overly controlled by the strongest (biggest/loudest) not necessarily by the guy whom knows where they are going.
I should stop using lame metaphors here.
Your morality is the only thing you have that is distinctly yours and more importantly, the full underlying identity of yourself. If you vote against your morals, then you vote against yourself, and thus, destroy your own integrity. Integrity is merely 'saying what you do' and' doing what you say'. Altering this paradigm simply because you ‘want your vote to count’ is quite possibly the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard, right up there with marching in a line to some unknown field and stripping naked. One might as well sell their vote if their moral integrity is so diminutive and give up on morality altogether (not an easy human trick).
What has greater value, the giving of the self, by maintaining ones core beliefs even when adversity and change makes inroads that possibly cut away some of the life you’ve created, or allowing, by constant change from outside the loss of morality, simply because ‘other people are doing it’? Our Mothers always warned us about jumping off of bridges, and yet we didn’t listen and instead base all politics and thus, our lives, in the hands of people whom simply got more people to jump off the bridge, not because they are better suited, but because people refuse to follow their own morality and chose instead to go along with the crowd.
"Your Voice Matters" - We hear this all the time, mostly by the two big political parties whom are simply trying to create a consensus in Washington that they were given a mandate by the voters to make changes. They don’t want your distinct voice, they want a large pie wedge to ensure that when they get there, they can do whatever they feel they were destined to do.
First off, I’m talking about the popular vote, not to be confused with the Electoral College. Because I’m not specifically talking about voting for the President of the United States and the current Electoral College is a convoluted mess due to moronic interpretations of the Constitution by some States, but am instead discussing the idea of all voting. I will use the General Presidential elections as a resource though. Let us look at the last Presidential election, again, just using the General Election statistics and ignoring the outcome of the Electoral College.
2012
Obama 65.9M votes for 51.01%
Romney 60.9M votes for 47.15%
Total other 1.84%
What this should mean, to anyone with an IQ above 9, is that the individuals whom live in this country did not give anyone a mandate, in fact they were pretty torn between two candidates. Notice, even if Romeny had received the 1.84% he still would have lost. And the "third party" argument holds no water here.
What if, a larger portion of people voted their views? What if communists voted for the socialist candidate? And so on. What if instead 10% from Obama and 10% from Romney went into that “other” section. Then suddenly you have Obama winning on 41.01% of the General vote against Romney’s 37.15%. But all of other contenders have 20%. This makes a huge statement to these men that think they are our kings and leaders. It tells them that 1. They are not the ruling class and that in fact people believe in many different things in this country and each thought is just as valuable as the next. 2. That they need to be conscience of what is occurring at the capital, because they obviously do not represent the whole country, but only a portion of it. 3. Those that stray to far into one political camp will get removed from office quicker, thus creating a more central government, whom might actually read the Constitution and try following it. **
Your vote changes the Pie, and the pie, is important not only to those that get elected, but to you. Right now when we look at those numbers we see that 1.84% other and we think that if we’d have voted our conscience and our own morality it wouldn’t have meant anything. That’s what the Government sees as well. They see that 1.84% as kooks and weirdos. They even, in our modern times, consider some of them terrorists and put them on watch lists. But again, imagine, instead that 1.84% being 21.84%, hell, even 10.84%. Suddenly those ‘crazy’ fringe people seem to have some legitimacy, even though, nothing has really changed, people are simply voting their morality and it is beginning to reflect on us, to open the dialog of individualism.
I’m not advocating that you vote the way I vote, just that you vote your own morality and that you hold your moral integrity as the center of yourself. If you’re a communist, vote that way. If your Tea-partier then vote that way. I don’t personally care and would only have conversations with you about why I agree or disagree, but would never pressure you into this ridiculous lie that you are wasting your vote, because you’re not. No vote is wasted, because our nation is built on the idea that we are individuals and thus, and this is important, WE are each a nation working collectively to ensure domestic tranquility (sound familiar?). Your vote is the single most important thing you do and if you vote your mind, vote your philosophy, vote your morality, then you really aren’t wasting your vote.
But if you go to the polls simply to vote for the more likely to win, then you’re in fact wasting your vote, as are those whom get in a line and march, wasting their lives by allowing others to measure it and decide its value. There is nothing superior or of significant value in allowing anyone else to measure the value of your life. Nothing unique in giving the power to others to write your meaning. Nothing useful, moral, godly, in giving up your unique thoughts, skills, hopes, dreams. Nothing Presidential in any group that would take such control, that would want such power. You may not realize it, but you are at war with these types of groups that would destroy your individualism.
Imagine one election where everyone whom would only vote for the person because they believe any other vote is a waste, simply stayed home and only the devout, went out to vote. Imagine how much more spread out the pie chart and the real change that would occur in our elected officials perspective.
Next time you hear people tell you that you are wasting your vote, tell them that you are voting your conscience and that you are free to make whatever choice you want because, you want real change. Real Change starts not with the collective taking of a blood oath and the destruction of the unique characteristics of each man and woman, but instead starts when we see all of other humans as our equals and measure our systems of government by that same litmus test.
----
** It is my opinion that the reason why people ignore Life, Liberty, and Estate (the core individual protections founded in the Constitution) and the overall expectation of the Constitution, is that they are of a mindset of 'numbers', that is their Mob is behind them, driving them forward.
But that’s just pie in the sky hogwash and worse, leaves the values and opinions of the so-called voter to not only others, but those possible beings years from now. Talk about a cop-out and leaving the weight of ones life on the shoulders of your children. Isn't it bad enough we leave them with our debt?
Those then argue that a vote for this imaginary third party is a wasted vote, like some kind of scrap of trash that no one will care about, no one will read about, no one will bother to even notice, except maybe some nerdy statistician or some future historian. Wasted? Meaning what? That I'm not important?
I have three points I make when I get into this argument.
All Parties are the First Party
There is no such thing as a third party.
Aug 28, 1963 Martin Luther King Jr., stood at the Lincoln Memorial and tried, desperately, to finally and for all time destroy the myth of minority. He tried to eliminate the presupposition that there were any real or arbitrary distinction that raised some and thus lowered other individuals in social strata. During his life he continually reminded people that we were equal -- none greater, none congregated by our skin or wealth -- by our humanity. Judged by the content of our characters he said. He was murdered, and like all men martyred, his message got lost in the men that would take up his flag and carry it on.
Now, if we are equal, you and I. Same value of existence. Same access to nature and natural rights (Life, Liberty, Estate) and under the same aspect of creation (that is we exist; how we got from non-existence to existence is a matter of religion and outside the scope of this paper). Then by simple deduction, our values are equal amongst themselves, regardless of our opinion of other peoples values. They merit a level of equality. This means, that whatever your opinion it is the ‘first’ opinion and whatever my opinion, it is the ‘first’ opinion. Since two different values cannot be equal to each other (e.g. 1 ≠ 2) then logically, our opinions must be made of the same underlying nature. That is, we as individuals make them and therefore, they are in a sense our existence.
Because of this, each person, not political party, is a unique fingerprint of thought that escorts a collective thought and works with other individuals to achieve goals. This means that all views, are equal and of similar value to each other. Even those I disagree with have merit as thought and demand a few moments of equal processing time to validate or invalidate. In other words, all political parties, made of unique individuals are equal to each other and by that nature are the First party. All parties are the highest singularity of themselves. Only narrow minded men would dare to demonize other people’s opinions with such outmoded childish thinking as to call a dissenting view ‘third’ and thus, like the proverbial third child, not of the same value as the first.
What’s worse is that the obvious demoralization intended by calling the parties that contain fewer members ‘third’ is lost on those individuals that seem to think themselves morally superior. Unable able to see the forest for the trees. In the end, whatever view point one person has, is the “First point” and thus, the First Party.
Morality / Integrity
I remember reading a story where Nazi’s rounded up thousands of people and marched them out of a city. Once outside the city they were told to strip naked, which they did and lie down in this large hole that had been dug. There, they were systematically shot. First by machine gun fire, then to ensure they were dead, one at time with a bullet to the back of the neck. How is this possible? How exactly does one person just get in a line, follow a group, get naked, and then allow themselves to be executed? Where did the individual go? Where did the process of personal thought, the idea of self, and more importantly, the integrity of individual desire retreat to? I’m no racist, or eugenicist, so I must assume, must, that these were all intelligent people whom wanted to live long and productive lives and that when faced with the possibility of sacrificing that life at the whim of another, there would be at least a few that would fight.
When I vote, I do not simply vote for the guy most likely to win. I do not vote for the guy who appeals to the masses. I do not vote for the underdog, or the guy whom would make a great leader. I vote my Morality. What this means is that when I go to the polls I have taken the time to find out whom the individuals are and I vote for people that agree with my view. I don’t vote for the guy whom sort of agrees with me on one subject and totally disagrees with me on the other. This is absurd. That is like trying to drive a car with two steering wheels, both trying to go in different directions. In the end, such a car either crashes, or is overly controlled by the strongest (biggest/loudest) not necessarily by the guy whom knows where they are going.
I should stop using lame metaphors here.
Your morality is the only thing you have that is distinctly yours and more importantly, the full underlying identity of yourself. If you vote against your morals, then you vote against yourself, and thus, destroy your own integrity. Integrity is merely 'saying what you do' and' doing what you say'. Altering this paradigm simply because you ‘want your vote to count’ is quite possibly the most absurd thing I’ve ever heard, right up there with marching in a line to some unknown field and stripping naked. One might as well sell their vote if their moral integrity is so diminutive and give up on morality altogether (not an easy human trick).
What has greater value, the giving of the self, by maintaining ones core beliefs even when adversity and change makes inroads that possibly cut away some of the life you’ve created, or allowing, by constant change from outside the loss of morality, simply because ‘other people are doing it’? Our Mothers always warned us about jumping off of bridges, and yet we didn’t listen and instead base all politics and thus, our lives, in the hands of people whom simply got more people to jump off the bridge, not because they are better suited, but because people refuse to follow their own morality and chose instead to go along with the crowd.
All Votes Change the Pie -- Your voice (really does) matter
"Your Voice Matters" - We hear this all the time, mostly by the two big political parties whom are simply trying to create a consensus in Washington that they were given a mandate by the voters to make changes. They don’t want your distinct voice, they want a large pie wedge to ensure that when they get there, they can do whatever they feel they were destined to do.
First off, I’m talking about the popular vote, not to be confused with the Electoral College. Because I’m not specifically talking about voting for the President of the United States and the current Electoral College is a convoluted mess due to moronic interpretations of the Constitution by some States, but am instead discussing the idea of all voting. I will use the General Presidential elections as a resource though. Let us look at the last Presidential election, again, just using the General Election statistics and ignoring the outcome of the Electoral College.
2012
Obama 65.9M votes for 51.01%
Romney 60.9M votes for 47.15%
Total other 1.84%
What this should mean, to anyone with an IQ above 9, is that the individuals whom live in this country did not give anyone a mandate, in fact they were pretty torn between two candidates. Notice, even if Romeny had received the 1.84% he still would have lost. And the "third party" argument holds no water here.
What if, a larger portion of people voted their views? What if communists voted for the socialist candidate? And so on. What if instead 10% from Obama and 10% from Romney went into that “other” section. Then suddenly you have Obama winning on 41.01% of the General vote against Romney’s 37.15%. But all of other contenders have 20%. This makes a huge statement to these men that think they are our kings and leaders. It tells them that 1. They are not the ruling class and that in fact people believe in many different things in this country and each thought is just as valuable as the next. 2. That they need to be conscience of what is occurring at the capital, because they obviously do not represent the whole country, but only a portion of it. 3. Those that stray to far into one political camp will get removed from office quicker, thus creating a more central government, whom might actually read the Constitution and try following it. **
Your vote changes the Pie, and the pie, is important not only to those that get elected, but to you. Right now when we look at those numbers we see that 1.84% other and we think that if we’d have voted our conscience and our own morality it wouldn’t have meant anything. That’s what the Government sees as well. They see that 1.84% as kooks and weirdos. They even, in our modern times, consider some of them terrorists and put them on watch lists. But again, imagine, instead that 1.84% being 21.84%, hell, even 10.84%. Suddenly those ‘crazy’ fringe people seem to have some legitimacy, even though, nothing has really changed, people are simply voting their morality and it is beginning to reflect on us, to open the dialog of individualism.
I’m not advocating that you vote the way I vote, just that you vote your own morality and that you hold your moral integrity as the center of yourself. If you’re a communist, vote that way. If your Tea-partier then vote that way. I don’t personally care and would only have conversations with you about why I agree or disagree, but would never pressure you into this ridiculous lie that you are wasting your vote, because you’re not. No vote is wasted, because our nation is built on the idea that we are individuals and thus, and this is important, WE are each a nation working collectively to ensure domestic tranquility (sound familiar?). Your vote is the single most important thing you do and if you vote your mind, vote your philosophy, vote your morality, then you really aren’t wasting your vote.
But if you go to the polls simply to vote for the more likely to win, then you’re in fact wasting your vote, as are those whom get in a line and march, wasting their lives by allowing others to measure it and decide its value. There is nothing superior or of significant value in allowing anyone else to measure the value of your life. Nothing unique in giving the power to others to write your meaning. Nothing useful, moral, godly, in giving up your unique thoughts, skills, hopes, dreams. Nothing Presidential in any group that would take such control, that would want such power. You may not realize it, but you are at war with these types of groups that would destroy your individualism.
Imagine one election where everyone whom would only vote for the person because they believe any other vote is a waste, simply stayed home and only the devout, went out to vote. Imagine how much more spread out the pie chart and the real change that would occur in our elected officials perspective.
Next time you hear people tell you that you are wasting your vote, tell them that you are voting your conscience and that you are free to make whatever choice you want because, you want real change. Real Change starts not with the collective taking of a blood oath and the destruction of the unique characteristics of each man and woman, but instead starts when we see all of other humans as our equals and measure our systems of government by that same litmus test.
----
** It is my opinion that the reason why people ignore Life, Liberty, and Estate (the core individual protections founded in the Constitution) and the overall expectation of the Constitution, is that they are of a mindset of 'numbers', that is their Mob is behind them, driving them forward.
Comments
Post a Comment