Voting is just a suggestion box for slaves. Those who need rulers and managers are not qualified to choose. Beggars can not be choosers. In a sense, asking people to make political decisions is like asking them to forecast the weather. They’re not in a position to do so, and it is silly to expect them to. Democracy entails people who run their businesses well being forced to run their businesses poorly by people who can’t run businesses at all. My rights and decisions are not up for discussion, let alone a vote, whether it be 75% of the population, the will of one king, or the whim of 100 senators. Remember that the proposal to quit voting is basically revolutionary; it amounts to a shifting of power from one group to another, which is the essence of revolution. As soon as the nonvoting movement got up steam, the politicians would most assuredly start a counterrevolution. Measures to enforce voting would be instituted; fines would be imposed for violations, and prison sentences would be meted out to repeaters. Propaganda, too, would bombard this passive resistance to statism; not only that put out by the politicians of all parties -the coalition would be as complete as it would be spontaneous- but also the more effective kind emanating from seemingly disinterested sources. All the monopolists, all the coupon-clipping foundations, all the tax-exempt eleemosynary institutions -in short, all the “respectables”- would join in a howling defense of the status quo. That is probably true, seeing how since the beginning of time men have sought to acquire property without laboring for it.
Rather than democracy, free-market economic thought and practice -which consist of people’s voluntary interactions and relationships- are the sole solution to all the world’s problems. I, too, will take part in the election, as I always do. However, my choice will not infringe upon anyone’s rights as a result of a transfer of power or the alleged necessity and legitimacy of total control; it will be entirely voluntary, peaceful and mutual. How, you ask? I will choose to carry out an exchange using Monero within the Market -the only form of democracy that functions seamlessly- meaning that I will opt for a peaceful exchange of value without taking away the rights of others. These are the only votes or choices that should be counted and respected.
Just because voting doesn't solve all political problems doesn't mean that it is antithetical to freedom. And while democracy is by no means perfect, it is much better than the historical alternatives, which all resulted in less personal freedom and power, not more. I think it's just one tool for the people in countries that have it available, along with the other great tools for personal agency such as Monero.
Additionally, having a smaller voting population is actually ideal for elected officials, because that is fewer needs that should be catered to in order to be reelected, so I doubt an anti-voting movement would be institutionally challenged at all.
Democracy is garbage. There have been many compelling arguments against it. I like Hans Herman Hoppe's in Democracy the God That Failed (which I would recommend you check out). You've been taught a false view of history (every form of government declares theirs as the best by design and indoctrinates it into their children via the educational system and controlled media entities). There have been many societies freer than our modern societies and without democracy. The more localized distribution of power is what historically produced the most freedom which has been attained better in prior societies to include examples like The Republic of Cospia, Early America (when the federal government couldn't effectively exert influence), and pre-christian Medieval Age Iceland. Only one of those was a "democracy" (democratic republic with limits on the voter base) and that was often on paper.
Well I can certainly agree with the sentiment that greater local governmental power is better for freedom, I still don't think that means democracy is garbage. In fact, having (comparatively) more powerful local government would strengthen the democratic process in my opinion.
I will have to check out the book recommendation, thank you for that :)
I agree directionally, but you're putting the destination as localized democracy and I'm putting it beyond that. If you haven't engaged with the arguments against democracy from pro-freedom people, I would advise you to do so.
You're welcome! Let me know what you think after! Maybe you can do a book review here if you're open to it.
Preach it.