Saturday, April 30, 2011

Voting in self-defense; no consent

I understand the sentiment of "voting in self defense". I have even done it in the past.

The thing is, I think a self-defensive voter needs to make very clear that the voting is only done to try to avoid difficulties later by either "legalizing" liberty, or by rejecting a "legalized" restriction on liberty, but that if the results of the election go against liberty the voter has no intention of going along with the result.

I still think it's better to laugh at the whole silly rigged game.



  1. Voting, even in self-defense, is wrong. Putting other people under coercive power is wrong. You can't support the guy who wants to take 30% of their money or the guy who wants to take 70% of their money.

  2. I don't consider voting for (or against) a candidate to be self defensive voting, but sometimes voting against a new tax or for a loosening of a previous law or against a new liberty-crushing "law" I could see as self defensive voting.

  3. Yes, I can see voting against a referendum. But it would still anger me that my act might give an appearance legitimacy to the State. And give to other people the impression that "voting is the way."