The last few years have been a mess, and I've repeatedly struggled to clarify my thoughts. So now I'm trying to actual tackle that by starting a Substack.
My first post, "I'm Not Political" addresses the need for those who have disengaged to step up in what is a critical moment in history.
That's where I'll be posting articles relating to primarily US and Canadian politics, though this will naturally intersect with culture and technology. So if you are interested in that type of thing and/or enjoy my first post, subscribing via email will get you alerted to anything new that goes up.
Welcome to Elle, fellas. If we have to be here, at least we get to do it together.
My first post, "I'm Not Political" addresses the need for those who have disengaged to step up in what is a critical moment in history.
That's where I'll be posting articles relating to primarily US and Canadian politics, though this will naturally intersect with culture and technology. So if you are interested in that type of thing and/or enjoy my first post, subscribing via email will get you alerted to anything new that goes up.
Welcome to Elle, fellas. If we have to be here, at least we get to do it together.
Recently Spotted:
robio (3m)
Ive sort of switched my brain off at this point when it comes to politics.
Even let my dad choose who I should vote for in recent elections as I'm not a fan of any of the parties.
That died an early death. Imagine if regular news articles did the same.
I used to be pro citation for things like this---until I realised that most of the time not only does the audience not check the citations, neither does the author using them! So, generally speaking, it's used to give an air of authority to something that shouldn't have it, with citations often contradicting the argument being made, or not even relevant.
The worst thing is when you find this to be the case in books by prominent historians.
I have full faith in you, though, and you've composed a fine argument.
Personally, the reason I don't vote (although I may make an exception this election) is indeed a political statement. I do not believe in representative democracy one bit. I'd prefer election by random lots, if we have to have a representative system, but better yet I'd prefer some form of anarchist democracy, and do not believe society should choose a single person or a group of people to have higher status than all others.
I'm directly affected by political decisions, without question. Some of them can even be altered to a small degree depending on which of the two neoliberal parties is in power, but having experience with various forms of anarchist organisations, the harm reduction in supporting representative democracy is not worth the cost. At least it isn't in Australia, anyway. Particularly when the greatest harms are all bipartisan positions. Not that a more direct form of democracy would help with some of them, as Australians are a sadistic bunch when it comes to certain groups of people. But it would help a lot with others, in a way neither of the consensus parties are willing to go, and most of the independent parties aren't willing to go beyond rhetoric on those issues, either.
I wonder how many times people have thought "well, this isn't a critical moment in history"
In some seriousness though, history isn't a chain of moments, it's a tide. I read your article. It's clear in what you want to convey, but, to me at least, there wasn't anything in there that isn't blatantly obvious.
I think it's a misconception to believe that most people are open minded and just want everyone to be welcome and happy. Most people are close minded and don't want anyone to be happy at the expense of their own wellbeing and well-feeling. We're social animals, we form groups of similar people to 'survive'. In today's world, it's very clear that there are many, many people who are different from you. So we feel embattled by those who are different. I don't know much about most American states, but I'd wager that all those states that are imposing restrictions on all kinds of stuff are states with low levels of multiculturalism. They're just trying to protect 'their way' of living, trying to keep the scary truth, that they're not the norm on a global scale, at bay.
And even more generally speaking: we see this happening all around the world. We are taking the benefits of a globalised, multicultural world for granted, only seeing the downsides. We have forgotten what a non-globalised world looked like, WW2 is too far behind us for people to see what reverting within our own bubble can lead too. So we think we're better off on our own once more. This, and climate change, are the biggest dangers to the relative peace we live in today.
Francis Fukuyama wrote a whole book about it!
Excellent blog and an extremely important message that sadly is going to fall on deaf ears or worse make the opposition feel "attacked". I am from what I feel is the worst state in America right now with the most vile garbage governor who has been on an absolute tear of conservative legislation so extreme that it's clearly all a bid to out Trump Trump in 2024. I live in a state that is now the least affordable state to live in, we have an affordable housing crisis, we have a climate change crisis (Miami will be underwater in the coming decades). So does the FL Republican run senate address any of this, NOPE, instead they go on a culture war which includes a pretty detailed abortion ban, don't say gay bill, anti woke bill, they changed one of the largest black voting districts and gutted it so they lose their voting power, and they get into a fight with Disney because the Disney CEO dared to criticize Desantis. Desantis like a petulant child can't take criticism so he acted like any shit head dictator would and took away Disney's right to govern themselves, which is a huge help to the state and the county, now that county will have a bill of a billion dollars and property taxes will skyrocket, but fuck people he got the headlines of going against "woke Disney". Now in the end nothing will happen to Disney as it's unconstitutional what they are doing but still Desantis cares about the culture, he wants to fight every anti woke, left battle there is to win brownie points to the right.
And that's the scariest part of all this, so many people love what he is doing. I have a bunch of my friends totally on board with all this, I fight with them all the time and well there is no point in discussing this, they are completely on board the right wing machine. Like the Don’t say gay bill, I explained it's a bill addressing nothing, kids in elementary school where not being taught about sexual orientation, but these friends are terrified about their kids hearing about gay people or worse that there are multiple genders. The phobia is real, and the republicans and the right feeds on it. The fear of the other, they are going to brainwash your kids, they are trying to take away your right to speak out (meaning insult and discriminate with impunity), they are anti white and anti religion. And this message is working, it's effective, it's scary how easy it is for a society to basically agree to treat certain groups like second class citizens that don't deserve the same rights as others. These people are willing to vote for a man who tried to overthrow a fair election... that's how dictatorships begin, with the people willing to forgo their voting rights to let authoritative figure take power.
The message to vote is so important because as bleak as it looks, those willing to support all groups do out number the ones trying to put them down. But the right is like an army, they VOTE. They will vote blindly, they don't care what kind of human scum is on the ballot, they vote red. Liberals, the younger vote, the minorities, have to mobilize like they did last election but I don't see it happening. We are much more worn down, Biden has not done a good job, a sense of disappointment in the leadership is palpable in the party, so I can see people not voting which in turn will let these republicans and more and more control and make America less tolerant than I have ever seen in my lifetime. It's horrifying.
Though I think your position is unusual, the sentiment of "I don't vote because *reasons*" is one that is common, and I can summarize my core point very succinctly here. I won't portend to know much about Australian politics, so I'll translate this to if you were American, which then means I'm not talking about you specifically.
Is your idyllic protest non-vote more important than abortion rights? Is it more important than trans people's right to medical care? Is it more important than the right to vote itself? I can't personally imagine the reasoning required to reach a conclusion that it is.
I know slightly more about UK politics than Australian, though not much more. There are definitely some major failings going on. I think switching off is probably the healthiest thing you can do for your mental health, so I'd never recommend my weird obsession. But what I would recommend is knowing just enough to get a sense of the priorities and values of the parties, particularly who are they trying to help and who are they trying to hurt.
I think you'll find it's not a protest non-vote, as I use an apolitical excuse so I don't get fined. If I vote, it will, however, be a protest vote.
Are abortion rights, trans people's right to medical care, or the right to vote more important than, say, the right to medical care for all people, the right to higher education, the right to organise labour, the minimisation of the harm of the biggest prison state since the Soviet Union*, or the right for, say, Afghans to eat and not be assassinated by drones? Your vote doesn't just protect the rights you mentioned, it also not only gives consent to but even supports the suppression of the rights I mentioned, becuase the party who supports those rights, also supports the supression of those other rights in practice, even if sometimes their rhetoric may push back against them.
So I don't think it's really that simple. Voting for important issues like you mentioned, doesn't mean that your vote doesn't impact others in similarly bad, or potentially even worse, ways.
But I find your position perfectly reasonable. There's no way to conduct politics without some people suffering at the expense of others, and that includes my idyllic non-voting practices.
*I recently read that per capita North Korea is worse than both, but the book was not a good source, so who knows.
In the US, this is very simple. One party is better on all of these issues as well, by a very large margin, than the other. I also question that you'd be able to find outside of a hypothetical a major political party that is willing to throw women and LGBTQ+ people under the bus, but is better for everyone on-the-whole than a party that doesn't.
Better does not mean perfect, and in a better system, there may be room for nuance and discussion. In the US, there's a choice between a normal political party, meaning flaws and all, or a fascist dictatorship. There is no inbetween, and sitting out means you're equally fine with either.
Pretty much this at this point.
Look at the news of the night, leaked report shows the Supreme Court will over turn roe vs Wade. Unbelievable.