|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:35 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | LTP wrote: |
What about the women's suffrage movement? Or black civil rights or labor unions or countless other changes started by citizens putting pressure on politicians. It's an uphill battle but hardly impossible. We can't expect everything to be handed to us. If we want changes in our political system we have to actually do something about it. |
The issue is where you get "we" from "me". Yes, you can do a lot if you have a ton of people, but most people do not have a ton of people behind them and are likely to never get a ton of people no matter how hard they fight for any cause. |
I always love when people attempt to extrapolate to aggregate behaviors when explaining what course of action I individually should take.
Me: "There is no valid reason to vote, because my vote will never impact an election result. Ever."
Yuppie Prole: "But if all the people who didn't vote did vote, they could actually make a difference."
Me: "Whoop de-freakin' do. I can't control anyone else's vote, I only have one vote and that vote is not only negligible, but also well within the counting error when they tabulate the results."
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 14174
Location: Omnipresent
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: |
I always love when people attempt to extrapolate to aggregate behaviors when explaining what course of action I individually should take.
|
You really ARE spiteful! |
|
| Back to top |
|
LTP
Raven
Joined: Jun 14, 2008
Age: 21
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | LTP wrote: |
What about the women's suffrage movement? Or black civil rights or labor unions or countless other changes started by citizens putting pressure on politicians. It's an uphill battle but hardly impossible. We can't expect everything to be handed to us. If we want changes in our political system we have to actually do something about it. |
The issue is where you get "we" from "me". Yes, you can do a lot if you have a ton of people, but most people do not have a ton of people behind them and are likely to never get a ton of people no matter how hard they fight for any cause. |
It is an accumulative process. Unless whatever your supporting is construed as totally wacky or insane chances are other people agree with you. Write to your politicians, start a blog, volunteer at campaign rallies do something anything however small even if you just vote. Now I'm not talking about you in specific awesome but I get tired of people who whine about the political system then do NOTHING about it. Hearing people moan about how they don't vote because it's pointless makes me want to break things. If your too lazy to vote or even write a letter you don't deserve to complain imo. Do you think activists magically run into each other and fix problems or do you think someone with a vision and will to do something brought them together? Ghandi moved an entire nation through peaceful demonstration and influenced future civil rights movements in other countries. Rachel Carson's writing mobilized the enviromental movement. I can list examples into antiquity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
LTP
Raven
Joined: Jun 14, 2008
Age: 21
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | LTP wrote: |
What about the women's suffrage movement? Or black civil rights or labor unions or countless other changes started by citizens putting pressure on politicians. It's an uphill battle but hardly impossible. We can't expect everything to be handed to us. If we want changes in our political system we have to actually do something about it. |
The issue is where you get "we" from "me". Yes, you can do a lot if you have a ton of people, but most people do not have a ton of people behind them and are likely to never get a ton of people no matter how hard they fight for any cause. |
I always love when people attempt to extrapolate to aggregate behaviors when explaining what course of action I individually should take.
Me: "There is no valid reason to vote, because my vote will never impact an election result. Ever."
Yuppie Prole: "But if all the people who didn't vote did vote, they could actually make a difference."
Me: "Whoop de-freakin' do. I can't control anyone else's vote, I only have one vote and that vote is not only negligible, but also well within the counting error when they tabulate the results." |
You don't have to take any action none at all but don't try to validate your apathy by dismissing all political movements. Your whole voting doesn't matter argument is soo overused usually by people who just want to avoid jury duty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
twoshots
Boltzmann Brain
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 4229
Location: Boötes void
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | Awesomelyglorious wrote: | | LTP wrote: |
What about the women's suffrage movement? Or black civil rights or labor unions or countless other changes started by citizens putting pressure on politicians. It's an uphill battle but hardly impossible. We can't expect everything to be handed to us. If we want changes in our political system we have to actually do something about it. |
The issue is where you get "we" from "me". Yes, you can do a lot if you have a ton of people, but most people do not have a ton of people behind them and are likely to never get a ton of people no matter how hard they fight for any cause. |
I always love when people attempt to extrapolate to aggregate behaviors when explaining what course of action I individually should take.
Me: "There is no valid reason to vote, because my vote will never impact an election result. Ever."
Yuppie Prole: "But if all the people who didn't vote did vote, they could actually make a difference."
Me: "Whoop de-freakin' do. I can't control anyone else's vote, I only have one vote and that vote is not only negligible, but also well within the counting error when they tabulate the results." |
"Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
It's yer duty to vote man. Do it. All the cool people are. 
_________________
* here for the nachos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Awesomelyglorious
Destroyer of worlds, reaver of souls
Joined: Dec 18, 2005
Posts: 14174
Location: Omnipresent
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LTP wrote: |
It is an accumulative process. Unless whatever your supporting is construed as totally wacky or insane chances are other people agree with you. Write to your politicians, start a blog, volunteer at campaign rallies do something anything however small even if you just vote. Now I'm not talking about you in specific awesome but I get tired of people who whine about the political system then do NOTHING about it. Hearing people moan about how they don't vote because it's pointless makes me want to break things. If your too lazy to vote or even write a letter you don't deserve to complain imo. Do you think activists magically run into each other and fix problems or do you think someone with a vision and will to do something brought them together? Ghandi moved an entire nation through peaceful demonstration and influenced future civil rights movements in other countries. Rachel Carson's writing mobilized the enviromental movement. I can list examples into antiquity. |
Well, whether *some* people agree with you is not the issue. The issue is getting a significant number. Frankly, whining is just exercising my 1st Amendment rights, especially given that most people don't care about your opinion. I think that activists are historical flukes of certain people, out of many, who somehow actually get success and often at great personal cost. Ghandi also put himself through starvation strikes and then was rewarded with death for his efforts. Rachel Carson also had some independent success by the time she had wrote Silent Spring, and certainly more independent success than most people will ever have nor that the people you complain about as complainers will likely have. The issue is never the example, but rather the proportion of successful activists vs the costs taken on per activist, and the effects of individual activists on average in an activist movement.
| Quote: | | You don't have to take any action none at all but don't try to validate your apathy by dismissing all political movements. Your whole voting doesn't matter argument is soo overused usually by people who just want to avoid jury duty |
Why not? He can validate his apathy however he wants. Not only that, but what is wrong with trying to avoid jury duty?
| twoshots wrote: | "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law."
It's yer duty to vote man. Do it. All the cool people are. flower |
"Kant sucks" - my thoughtful paraphrase of Ayn Rand.
Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:12 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LTP wrote: | | You don't have to take any action none at all but don't try to validate your apathy by dismissing all political movements. Your whole voting doesn't matter argument is soo overused usually by people who just want to avoid jury duty. |
Oh, I'm not apathetic, I've just come to terms with the fact that I personally will not be a significant player in the decision-making process. Anyways, I mostly employ that argument against people who are pushy about telling me I "have" to vote for either McCain or Obama, otherwise I'm just "wasting my vote." BTW, what does jury duty have to do with any of this?
As far as your "If you don't vote you can't complain" argument... I've heard it before, and I still can't figure it out. It seems like a pretty simple non sequitor to me, and yet it is always presented as though it is an outright refutation of non-voting. Is there a step in this reasoning that I'm missing?
Gandhi may have "moved an entire nation" but there was already signigifcant sentiment among the Indians against British rule. I would credit Gandhi with making the movement peaceful rather than violent, but not with creating the Indian independence movement. That's a bit exaggerated.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twoshots wrote: | | "Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law." |
I'd be quite happy if everyone stopped voting. The government would then lose all its credibility. Believe it or not, for many people not voting is actually a well-reasoned moral and political decision. If you vote, you are agreeing to abide by the result of the election, and there are some pretty significant moral issues inherent in democracy.
| Quote: | | It's yer duty to vote man. Do it. All the cool people are. |
It is not my "duty" to vote, and whoever first put forward such a notion is a dolt. What do I do if no candidate running represents my views? Do I pick the "lesser of two evils?" HELL NO! You quoted Kant above, do you want it to become a "universal law" that people will settle for leaders who do not represent them on the basis that someone even worse was running against them?
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
twoshots
Boltzmann Brain
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 4229
Location: Boötes void
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
^So you aren't acting based on the insignificance of your vote, but as a conscientious objector? Of course you could rationalize it within the language of the categorical imperative, but I was just poking at the insignificance argument which you were presenting as obviously true.
| AG wrote: | | "Kant sucks" - my thoughtful paraphrase of Ayn Rand. |
Zing confirmed 
_________________
* here for the nachos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twoshots wrote: | | ^So you aren't acting based on the insignificance of your vote, but as a conscientious objector? Of course you could rationalize it within the language of the categorical imperative, but I was just poking at the insignificance argument which you were presenting as obviously true. |
No, I was simply pointing out that non-voting is a valid choice, and it annoys me when people try to always have the moral high ground when they in fact don't. A more compelling argument against voting probably comes from marginal cost vs marginal utility (the marginal utility of voting is 0, the marginal cost is non-zero and positive, thus voting would seem to violate the rationality assumption). And the insignificance argument I presented is true. My vote will not impact election results. You can try, tortuously, to argue from aggregate behavior that my vote does matter, but even then it is only in a very indirect and roundabout fashion, and I really find such arguments rather unconvincing.
Hm, odd, I am simultaneously arguing on deontological and utilitarian grounds. And in either framework, voting is the wrong decision.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
twoshots
Boltzmann Brain
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 4229
Location: Boötes void
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
Individually rational, stable but globally sub-optimal strategy? Does anyone smell a Prisoner's Dilemma coming on?
_________________
* here for the nachos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
LTP
Raven
Joined: Jun 14, 2008
Age: 21
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | twoshots wrote: | | ^So you aren't acting based on the insignificance of your vote, but as a conscientious objector? Of course you could rationalize it within the language of the categorical imperative, but I was just poking at the insignificance argument which you were presenting as obviously true. |
No, I was simply pointing out that non-voting is a valid choice, and it annoys me when people try to always have the moral high ground when they in fact don't. A more compelling argument against voting probably comes from marginal cost vs marginal utility (the marginal utility of voting is 0, the marginal cost is non-zero and positive, thus voting would seem to violate the rationality assumption). And the insignificance argument I presented is true. My vote will not impact election results. You can try, tortuously, to argue from aggregate behavior that my vote does matter, but even then it is only in a very indirect and roundabout fashion, and I really find such arguments rather unconvincing.
Hm, odd, I am simultaneously arguing on deontological and utilitarian grounds. And in either framework, voting is the wrong decision. |
The power of voting does rely on numbers yes but how do you take that to mean a single vote has no quantifiable value? Lets assume for the moment that 25% of the votes are negated does that completely invalidate the other 75%? What your suggesting seems to be a self-fufilling prophecy. I don't think voting matters therefore I refuse to vote thus ensuring my vote will not matter.
What then is the right decision. Are you saying there is no decision? I refuse to believe a citizen has absolutely no influence on the system as a whole. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| twoshots wrote: | | Individually rational, stable but globally sub-optimal strategy? Does anyone smell a Prisoner's Dilemma coming on? |
You have yet to demonstrate that higher voter turnout leads to optimal results. You just assumed it to be true.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
twoshots
Boltzmann Brain
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
Posts: 4229
Location: Boötes void
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Orwell wrote: | | twoshots wrote: | | Individually rational, stable but globally sub-optimal strategy? Does anyone smell a Prisoner's Dilemma coming on? |
You have yet to demonstrate that higher voter turnout leads to optimal results. You just assumed it to be true. |
More people voting would lead to higher legitimacy of the regime and consequently a net gain in the justice value of the institution of government. And governments ought to be just.
_________________
* here for the nachos. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Orwell
Outer Party Member
Joined: Aug 09, 2007
Age: 23
Posts: 13715
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 1:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| LTP wrote: | | The power of voting does rely on numbers yes but how do you take that to mean a single vote has no quantifiable value? Lets assume for the moment that 25% of the votes are negated does that completely invalidate the other 75%? |
Your argument here seems somewhat incomprehensible. Could you clarify?
| Quote: | | What your suggesting seems to be a self-fufilling prophecy. I don't think voting matters therefore I refuse to vote thus ensuring my vote will not matter. |
Not really. Again, you are making baseless assumptions. It's not a self-fulfilling prophecy if it is true with or without the prophecy. The difference in outcome between my voting and my not voting is zero, so your argument breaks down anyways. And some people have argued that not voting is in fact a vote—a sort of vote of no confidence in the system, a statement that the candidates running do not represent your interests and neither does whoever the winner turns out to be.
| Quote: | | What then is the right decision. Are you saying there is no decision? I refuse to believe a citizen has absolutely no influence on the system as a whole. |
You may believe or not believe whatever you please, your personal opinions have no impact on objective reality. Individual citizens may sometimes have influence on the system, but there is the issue AG already brought up about the numbers of activists as compared to the amount of success, essentially a problem of marginal cost and marginal utility that would seem to indicate that it is not generally worth it to try to influence the system. And actually, I read a claim once (I don't remember where, I might try to dig it up later) that one can influence an election more by going out and campaigning all day and never voting. So regardless of whether you're trying to change society or not, voting seems to be a rather inefficient medium for that.
_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
