Are you voting & why?

Namaste said:
Yes i do remember the blogging and everything else we did. But at that time France (leaders) was not as "american" as it is now. It might be utopian but maybe Ségolène Royal would have sold the France to the US less rapidly that Sarkozy. It could have made a little difference.

It could have, or not. Who knows?
As I said, one never knows, so personally, I say to myself 'why not try' (not to vote FOR but to vote AGAINST). I've tried both (voting / not voting) and I really don't think that there's an objectively "right" thing to do in such cases. It's a matter of personal choice.

But for the us election, i think both candidates are quite similar.

I think the configuration in the US is similar to the one in France in that we both have pathological loonies (Sarko/McCain aka Palin) VS not so pathological loonies (Ségo/Obama). There lies the difference between the candidates.
 
Myth Of Myself said:
So you're saying that if one doesn't participate in a known corrupt system, you have no right to complain about it?

Voting and "complaining", (I would substitute "informing oneself" and "protesting") are not mutually exclusive.

The infrastructure that oversees voting is corrupt, but not the principles behind the right to vote are not. The refusal to vote only benefits those who wish to destroy the right to vote.

I am very well aware of what is going on, and I voted anyway. So did all those people ahead of me who made the line an hour long.

I really don't get how you came to your conclusion, Myth of Myself, that anyone who contributed to this thread is saying that you can't complain about a corrupt system if you don't vote.

Complain away.
 
webglider said:
I really don't get how you came to your conclusion, Myth of Myself, that anyone who contributed to this thread is saying that you can't complain about a corrupt system if you don't vote.
Complain away.


well, maybe he got it from here:

rs said:
I still believe that if one cannot be bothered to vote, then one is not entitled to complain about the outcome.

and

Prayers for rain said:
I'd say if you don't even bother to make this small act, to state that even if the voting system is corrupted and your vote doesn't count on THIS level, you still intend to send a message to the Universe/yourself about what you DON'T want, then you have no right to complain.
 
Yep, Bernhard just summed up the comments that I was referring to in my post.

The opinion of "if you do not vote, you have no right to complain." is rather clear in the posts that are referenced.

It's a good idea to read an entire thread before jumping to conclusions about the subject matter or discussions that are already in progress.
 
I think anyone is entitled to complain about the candidates, whether they voted or not. Its true that peoples opinions change based upon new facts, so arguing about whether or not your entitled to complain based on whether you voted or not seems ... pointless. Now, I think there is plenty of information out there that you should be able to make an informed choice NOW, but a lot of people will not do that, so perhaps later down the road their information will be more up to date, etc.

I personally did vote, but I skipped the presidential election. I couldn't vote for either of the main candidates because well, they are virtually the same with different faces. However, I agree with Autobot that while I can see what Obama really is (thanks to some great articles on SOTT) I still do have this urge to like him. I don't really know why this is.
 
Bernhard said:
well, maybe he got it from here:

rs said:
I still believe that if one cannot be bothered to vote, then one is not entitled to complain about the outcome.

Prayers for rain said:
I'd say if you don't even bother to make this small act, to state that even if the voting system is corrupted and your vote doesn't count on THIS level, you still intend to send a message to the Universe/yourself about what you DON'T want, then you have no right to complain.

Sorry about that, it was a gut reaction (and yes I jumped on this thread in a rush, not the best thing to do). The "if you don't vote you have no right to complain" was a silly "turn-around" response to what I think is another silly statement :"if you vote you have no right to complain" – which I've heard some people say.
I think there are valid arguments and motives from both sides. I do think that in the end it's really a personal matter and there's objectivally no right thing to do as far as voting/non voting is concerned.
 
I don't understand why people are even bothering to vote with all the blatant "in your face" election rigging taking place. I actually heard people saying things like, "I know it might be rigged but maybe my vote will count for something anyway. Maybe it will send a message to the PTB if I vote for the Green Party." If you don't like the food at a restaurant are you going to continue supporting the business because you think the food may improve? I think this is just basically, people are fearful of change. For the most-part everyone knows the election is rigged but no one is willing to to do anything about it. They're hoping the government will fix it... IMO, by casting a vote you are telling the PTB you are still brainwashed into believing in their system.
 
Hello Everyone

Thanks so much for your thoughts on this subject so far. Here are some more of my thoughts, I’ll start with this.

A few weeks ago, I was just like you Autobot, I wanted Obama to win. I would hear from so many people how he’s “the answer to America’s problems” and how he is “the next Martin Luther King”. So I started to question myself, and why I wanted him to win. I started to think, well wait… if he was so great than why would he be in such a place of power at this time. Would the PTB really allow it?

So I started doing some research, and after that I came to the following conclusion.

If you look in the dictionary for the word “False Hope” You should find a picture of Obama in there. Obama is like a fake fruit, it may look amazing and juicy on the outside, but you take one bite, and you’ll end up spitting it right out. To me, this election is not even about a two party system anymore. It is a one party system, Republican. Obama is a very conservative democrat and his views on many things, most importantly about the “war on terror” are very similar to republicans. That’s why so many republicans are voting for him.

McCain’s party is also “Republican” in name, but they are a joke. And more so than representing the Republican Party, they represent the Evangelic party. McCain is also very old and ill and the chances of his death within his first term of presidency is very high, which would put Palin in line for presidency. And she’s even crazier.

SAO-I don't think the effort to flip votes is by the PTB, it's most likely by the candidates themselves. They both want to get into that position of power. The PTB could very well not care which one makes it, they've both been more than likely vetted and pre-approved. I don't think the PTB need to "rig votes" to keep someone out of the office. If they didn't want Obama to be in office, you wouldn't even hear his name on TV or know who he is at all.

I very much agree with this. That’s how I see it too. If Obama was anything like MLK than he’d be shot already. He does not represent anything that MLK stood for, like peace. The word “peace” has a very twisted meaning in Obama’s dictionary.

An example of this is, Obama says he will hunt down Osama Bin laden to the ends of the earth and will kill him. What if one day, after Obama becomes president they get some news about how Osama has been doing dealings with Iran, and now he’s hiding somewhere in Iran. So than Iran becomes a sudden threat of national security (even more so than now) and must be dealt with by any means necessary.

Obama was asked during the presidential debates, “If Israel was attacked by Iran, would you put troops to protect Israel without going to the Senate”, and he responded that he would do anything within his power to protect Israel at all costs. So he didn’t say no.

To me, Obama is just a very good politician. He knows Nero linguistic programming well, and he uses it to its full extent in his speeches.

So after all the studying I did about him, I realised that it was a ‘wishful thinking I’ within myself that wanted Obama to “win”. But in the end, whether Obama wins or McCain wins, who are the real winners? Certainly not the people.

The way I see it is, if Obama wins than the American people will go back to the perpetual sleep. If McCain wins, it might raise some heads as to the legitimacy of their voting system since SO many people including the media is for Obama. Therefore, that may come as a shock and people may go :huh:

Autobot- Voting, the process, is a learning experience - thus the fun. The people in line, the looks on their faces, the murmurs, the smells and the emotions surrounding the event are quite potent. Just being there and taking it all in while observing yourself is an invaluable experience imho, and I wouldn't skip that for fear of 'sustaining the illusion'.

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but isn’t that like someone saying I’m going to just play World of Warcraft (WOW) just so I can observe myself and other people in it. Yet you know it’s a fake world and a fake system, and that your energy is going to nothing, but you just want to observe it. Aren’t you kidding yourself?

[...]Given all they do to dissuade voters, they don't want you to vote. So I will and I'll take more from the experience then the average bear, looking at all the gems along the path, so to speak. [...]
Bernhard--Who are "they" and who doesn't want you to vote? Seems to me everyone, from Celebrities, to Rock Stars, to Politicians (left and right) push everyone to vote, vote and vote! It's all about VOTING. That's the problem. People are so locked into the idea that they must vote and so loose ability to critical think and analyze before "doing" so. It's like "vote, no matter what!".
Seems more like the opposite. If you tell someone you are not voting, you are looked at like a traitor or unpatriotic.
So where do you pick up that "they" dissuade voters? I don't see it.

That’s how I see it too Bernhard, all I ever see/hear is GO VOTE! Just don’t be undecided, doesn’t matter who you vote for, just VOTE!

Namaste-Yes i do remember the blogging and everything else we did. But at that time France (leaders) was not as "american" as it is now. It might be utopian but maybe Ségolène Royal would have sold the France to the US less rapidly that Sarkozy. It could have made a little difference.

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but is this idea not the same as, let’s just delay the inevitable? Isn’t the point not to get to the inevitable? The inevitable being a fully corrupted government/system (not that we don’t live in one already, lol…)

I think, a good presidential candidate for America at this time would be ideally someone who more so than anything, questions the events that happened on 9-11. If someone like that were to come along and make it his first act as president to re-open the investigations of what happened on 9-11, and who was responsible; no matter how ugly the truth might be. THAT is the true leader America needs right now. Not someone who believes in all the lies and follows the same path as the liars.

In closing, I’d just like to thank everyone again for their input; this thread has been much food for thought for me.
 
Not voting is equall to giving your vote away to someone because it doesnt make much of a difference not voting when everyone else is. I dont have the chance to vote because i`m not american but I would vote for Barrack Obama, cause i`d do anything I can to keep miss Sarah Palin from any kind of political power.
 
Knowledge_of_self said:
Namaste-Yes i do remember the blogging and everything else we did. But at that time France (leaders) was not as "american" as it is now. It might be utopian but maybe Ségolène Royal would have sold the France to the US less rapidly that Sarkozy. It could have made a little difference.

Correct me if I’m wrong here, but is this idea not the same as, let’s just delay the inevitable? Isn’t the point not to get to the inevitable? The inevitable being a fully corrupted government/system (not that we don’t live in one already, lol…)

One can't be 100% sure (talking about the French election here). Maybe all is not so carefully planned, maybe they don't plot everything perfectly, due to their wishful thinking.
I think what really counts is the intent, whether you vote or not. You can say "No" to religious fanatics/psychopaths by voting, as a statement to the Universe. Voting doesn't necessarily mean you're brainwashed into wishful thinking. You can vote consciously, not lying to yourself about the reasons. That's how I see it anyway. It serves no one to say "you should/must" or "shouldn't/mustn't" vote. As the C's say, one will do what one will do.

I'm reminded of this quote :

G said:
"What does obyvatel actually mean?" asked somebody. "Can it be said that an obyvatel is a good citizen?"

"Ought an obyvatel to be patriotic?" someone else asked. "Let us suppose there is war. What attitude should an obyvatel have towards war?"

"There can be different wars and there can be different patriots," said G. "You all still believe in words. An obyvatel, if he is a good obyvatel, does not believe in words. He realizes how much idle talk is hidden behind them. People who shout about their patriotism are psychopaths for him and he looks upon them as such."

"And how would an obyvatel look upon pacifists or upon people who refuse to go to the war?"

"Equally as lunatics! They are probably still worse
."

One could have asked G : Ought an obyvatel vote or not? :rolleyes:
 
Disinfo said:
Not voting is equall to giving your vote away to someone because it doesnt make much of a difference not voting when everyone else is.
ummm, I'm sorry but this sentence made me go whaa? :huh: :huh:
In this case, neither I or anyone is the only one not voting. There are a LOT of people who don't vote because of lack of faith in the parties and many other reasons, so they are not alone. Could you explain your thoughts a bit more on this?
I dont have the chance to vote because i`m not american but I would vote for Barrack Obama, cause i`d do anything I can to keep miss Sarah Palin from any kind of political power.

That's understandable.
 
Myth-Of-Myself said:
It's a good idea to read an entire thread before jumping to conclusions about the subject matter or discussions that are already in progress.

So you're saying that if one doesn't participate in a known corrupt system, you have no right to complain about it?

The "taste" or "tone" of these two comments seem to be quite confrontational. I have seen fights break out among kids using similar tactics where the person being addressed is put on the defensive.

Perhaps you're not aware that you are doing this?

For example, you could make your point simply by using the word "Why"?

"Why do you feel that if you don't vote, you have no right to complain about it?"

As for the other comment, it too was totally unnecessary. I obviously got the point from Bernhard's post which pointed out the obvious that I had skipped a number of posts and then let it drop. Your follow up post was unnecessary.

Why do you feel the need to frame your posts in such a confrontational way?
 
Webglider,

When I stated,
"It's a good idea to read an entire thread before jumping to conclusions about the subject matter or discussions that are already in progress."

I feel this statement is obvious in it's logic and is a relevant response to your comment,

"I really don't get how you came to your conclusion, Myth of Myself, that anyone who contributed to this thread is saying that you can't complain about a corrupt system if you don't vote."

Which was obviously made without referring to the entire post or I'm sure you wouldn't have made it because the statements were there as Bernhard pointed out.

1. I had no intention of attacking anyone with these statements.
2. I think that my comments are relevant to the conversation in this thread.

When someone is addressed directly in a thread, I feel they have every right to respond regardless of what comments may or may not have been made by other forum members.
I'm sorry if my statements brought back disturbing images for you about playground fights you may have witnessed or experienced, I assure you that was not my intention.

Also a point I'd like to make which is rather obvious but nonetheless valid is, the reason I didn't phrase the my point the way you would choose to is because we are two different people.

Why would you ask others "why" they don't phrase their sentences or words like you would choose to?

:rockon:
 
Hi MythofMyself,  for what it's worth, you are coming across in a rather confrontational way, considering the content of this thread thus far.  Judging from the replies on this thread, this is a rather emotional subject, which causes people to respond in a more reactionary way than might be usual. 

When one responds in such an emotional manner, there is usually more going on that meets the eye.  It might be worth considering why webglider's response struck such a chord.  Of course, the same applies to webglider, if she finds herself reacting emotionally as well.

This forum works very hard to maintain a comfortable environment for all, thus caustic or venomous remarks are strongly discouraged - just a reminder - we're all on the same 'side' here.
 
Back
Top Bottom