shopify analytics tool

“If Congress was your co-worker” starring Chris Pine

2016 is when more Americans will vote against someone rather than for someone.

Read More...
Comments

2016 Election

I don't like either candidate. I don't trust either candidate. And I definitely don't trust the two major parties.

Read More...
Comments

The default SHOULD be None of the Above

All your life, you’ve been taught that SOME government is better than NO government.



Read More...
Comments

Why every election needs a "None Of The Above"

Does the common good come at the expense of the individual?

Read More...
Comments

Supermarket theory of government

This is a page from the original version of Pagan Vigil. There are some formatting differences.

Originally published at www.paganvigil.com/C127135145/E20071204130728


Supermarket theory of government


Demand your right to choose nothing and have it count

Sunni Maravillosa is part of a growing number of small "l" libertarians who believes that Ron Paul is no libertarian and voting for him sacrifices freedom.

I agree with her, but I don't think that is the whole problem. My answer is in the technopagan green.

Call me old-fashioned, but I still think the one True Answer is None of the Above.

If you HAVE to choose one from Column A OR one from Column B without the ability to walk away, that is not really a choice.

Oh, I may throw in refinements, like barring the losing candidates from serving in that office for the term of that office, or insisting that in order to "win" a candidate has to carry a majority of eligible voters and not just a majority of those who voted or a majority of registered voters. But in the end, it's the same thing.

Rejecting the choices offered is still a valid choice. Otherwise you're playing three-card monty and the red card is never where you think it is.

I call it the supermarket theory of government. I am not required to buy a cola, or even a soft drink, or any beverage at all. Indeed, I don't have to buy anything or even go into the store.

If there HAS to be a choice between 1, 2, or 3, there is no reason for 1, 2, or 3 to be significantly different unless there is a 0. And if it has to be 1, 2, or 3, there is no reason that the 1, 2, or 3 HAVE to appeal to the disaffected because 1, 2, or 3 will win no matter what the unhappy voters do.

I agree that RP is no libertarian. But he is a symptom, not the problem.

Posted: Tue - December 4, 2007 at 01:07 PMA class="pvc" HREF="http://www.paganvigil.com

Comments
2019       2018       2017       2016       2015       2014       2011       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       2005