Only the Good Vote Young

When political commentators discuss voting blocs, the age of voters is often a key focus. But political commentators don't treat age blocs equally. Here are the narratives we are given:

When old people vote as a bloc, we are told it is out of fear. And the politicians who target them by demagoguing Social Security and Medicare? They are accused of cynically pandering to the fears of elderly voters.

But when young people vote as a bloc, we are told they are simply making their voices heard! It is the beauty of the political process! And the politicians who pander to them by making impossible promises about issues like education? Why, they are simply paving the way for a brighter future! No cynicism here, friends.

I think this is because the media is enamored with the narrative of the 60s youth movement; the narrative that says young people rose up as one warm and fuzzy voice to cuddle a broken nation. So whenever young people appear to be voting as a bloc again, the media always frames it as "a moment."

Funny, all we ever hear is that today's youth are stupid, lazy, ignorant of history, blah, blah, blah, but when those stupid, lazy youths rise up to force their stupidity, laziness, and ignorance of history on the rest of us via the voting booth, we're supposed to hail this as a wonderful thing.

Pandering is pandering, whether it is lying to deathbed voters about saving Medicare, or lying to young voters about making education cheaper. In either case, one generation is shifting the cost of its preferences onto another. So why does the media present one as "progress" and the other as "fear-based?"

Every move made by every politician is politics, and every promise, no matter how much faux optimism is lacquered on it, and is designed to generate votes from a specific group. Whether the target is old or young, there is always an element of fear:

"Unlike my opponent, I understand the needs of our seniors, which is why I'm going to preserve _____."

"My opponent wants to cut _____. But I know what our young people need to compete in today's global economy, which is why I'm going to invest in _____."

For some reason pandering to the fears of the young doesn't spark accusations of fear-mongering. Maybe politicians should change FDR's phrase to: "The only thing we have to fear is the AARP."

I always vote for "apathy"

“If voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.”

--Emma Goldman

I don't vote. I also avoid conversations about voting, because when I mention I don't vote, otherwise reasonable people respond by shrieking like a freebasing hyena.

Man travels in packs; even supposed !INDIVIDUALISTS! feel better when they can be part of the mob. Voting helps sate this craving, and trying to argue the herd out of herding is like giving the finger to gravity. Doesn't accomplish much.

Still, the sanctimony of proud voters during Presidential races is so feverish I can't help myself.

The least impressive argument I hear from voters: People died to give you the right to vote.

So what? People also died defending the Third Reich. Their dying for a cause doesn't alter the merits of the cause one bit. Dying isn't a big deal. People die running themselves over with their own riding lawnmowers. Their death doesn't elevate my view of them.

Look at how progressives react when a Christian tells them Jesus died for us. The progressives laugh, gag, or squawk (not a bad name for a game show). What they don't do is start going to church. Progressives--or just non-Christians in general--don't feel any obligation to Christ based on his dying for a cause.

I remember once speaking to someone--a proud progressive, AND SHE VOTES!--who couldn't leave well enough alone. She kept serving big, clichéd bowls of "It's your civic duty to vote" chowder.

Finally I said something like, "I don't believe in the political system, so by not participating, I am being the change I want to see in the world."

If anyone should appreciate my mentality, it should be progressives. Or so their slogans--Think globally, act locally--would lead us to believe. I don’t believe in voting, so by not voting, I am being the change I want to see in the world. I am thinking globally and acting locally. I am following Ghandi's advice.

George Carlin said it best:

I have solved this political dilemma in a very direct way: I don't vote. On Election Day, I stay home. I firmly believe that if you vote, you have no right to complain. Now, some people like to twist that around. They say, 'If you don't vote, you have no right to complain,' but where's the logic in that? If you vote, and you elect dishonest, incompetent politicians, and they get into office and screw everything up, you are responsible for what they have done. You voted them in. You caused the problem. You have no right to complain. I, on the other hand, who did not vote — who did not even leave the house on Election Day — am in no way responsible for what these politicians have done and have every right to complain about the mess that you created.

Love and Lemmings

In modern America divorce is as much of an institution as marriage. The results--particularly the financial results for men--are calamitous. Today marriage is a lease, not a buy. Everyone is aware of this. Everyone acknowledges that marriage is a countdown to separation. Divorce surprises no one.

Yet what happens when you tell people you don’t believe in marriage? They react like you're some kind of curiosity from the future. Even if they aren't religious. Even if they are a group of divorcees. The fact that you aren't eager to become another predictable divorce statistic renders you an outcast.

Same thing with politics. You sit around a bar and listen to everyone list all the reasons why the political system doesn’t work, all the reasons the government is unfixable. Then when you say you don’t vote, outrage abounds! You are immediately treated with suspicion and disdain. How dare you not participate in this thing we all agree is irreparable!

It seems it is perfectly fine to skewer the sacred cows of marriage and voting, just as long as after you're done skewering you promise to line up with all the suckers. As long as you pledge not to change your behavior in light of the facts of marriage and politics, you are in the clear. The second you act on this knowledge, you are kicked out of the conversation. It's fine to complain, just as long as you promise not to do anything about it. This is the opposite of the advice people usually give you. 

 

So if you want people to take your advice on relationships, don't give them the best advice of all; avoid marriage. If you want people to take your disdain for politics seriously, don't reveal your non-voting record.

Why? Because MAN is a herd animal, and people want company on the Titanic.

Every year is an election year

How many times have you been watching the news and heard a reporter/pundit say something like, "But don't expect anything to be done about it any time soon. After all, it's an election year."

Elections are purported to be this sacred ritual we're supposed to honor and participate in. Yet the skeptical tone of the "it's an election year" line tells you all you need to know about elections; sorry voters, can't expect anything practical this year. Why not? Because this year we're holding those holy elections you're conditioned to revere!

Leaving aside what this says about the fatal flaws of elected government, today's 24/7 news cycle and the constant need for content means that for all practical purposes, now every year is an election year, so the likelihood of government honesty is even lower. There are no "off years" where officials might temporarily abstain from the more conspicuous pandering of the campaign trail, which at least theoretically would allow adult thinking to sneak into the process.

Simply put: the political junkiedom/news entertainment trend that has spawned this 24-hour news monstrosity is making the political process even more cynical and duplicitous. Far from being "watchdogs," the "political junkies" and news celebs have actually made it harder for the Washington shills to take a day off from shilling.

I suppose I should lament this development, but as it is the news celebrities and their glassy-eyed patsy fans who are often the most zealous about declaring it our "duty" to vote, it is more fun to sit back and watch them transparently betrayed by the process they celebrate.