A modern commentary that is non-academic and non-bureaucratic is the tradition of the Non-Voter. Not everyone should have to burden the weight of democracy. Some people should get a pass. Whether it be to learn more, abstain from an argument, or pursuit a working grind or maybe self-declared mental limitations. We ought to view non-voting as admirable and a form of peacekeeping.
We should make efforts to collectivize with like-minded people.
This being said, although that is a duty of democracy. Why don’t we give it time? When I was 18 I had a head of steam and I was ready to vote. I am still ready to vote when the time comes because I keep myself informed. As a writer, I practice the exercise of opinion. This could be an exhausting and boring duty to some. Also a Democratic population unhinged would have a battlefield of tribalism. A moderate democracy ought to be recognized and celebrated.
What is wrong with sitting out?
(Utilitarianism suggests happiness ought to be considered in situations of scarcity. The U.S. had a capacity issue with taking votes in the Democratic primary. Site closures mean they can accept fewer votes per location. Economics wise it allows passionate voters to participate and apathetic people to sign out. If political movements aren’t speaking to you. Or even maybe you reject the concept of the state entirely. (Hopefully not the second one.) Maybe you feel unattached to the debated issues. Or even from your own intellect. Either way, we should allow a tradition of sitting out and peacekeeping. I think Political science in school is designed to demand democratic participation. However, we have to acknowledge feelings of alienation especially when consider the Socialist and Libertarian traditions of politics.
For the record I voted once from a non-voter family member’s residence in municipal politics. I think since he paid the bills he ought to get the credit for that vote. Even if it went no where. Objectively speaking Duncan Armstrong was a weak politician. My website definitely gets more traffic than his did. It is sad the Progressive municipal movement was soley up to him. Jim Harrisson is definitely a media savy mayor.
I just also think we overemphasize voting and underemphasize donating as well. A Capitalist would theorize that donating would actually make democracy more accurate. Not that I am a capitalist. However, I think democracy is partially now about resource management.
Ashton Deroy Writes: Honestly, I am so happy someone just took the time to engage me on a topic I am so passionate about and that is Universal Basic Income. Now I want to let my audience know that I am more of a Labour style Socialist. I am a Liberal Socialist after all. Here is what someone wrote to me about Universal Basic Income.
“Then what is your solution to automation and the reduction of unskilled labor that used to be the entry point into the workforce? Or if people are forced into quarantine and cannot go to work? Sounds economic policy can’t exist when those writing the policies benefit from the system as it is, unless there is a belief or rallying cry from an electorate that holds its politicians accountable instead of voting because they wave a blue or red flag. UBI at least addresses some of these issues without prioritizing stockholders or corporate interests first.”
Ashton Deroy‘s response:
There is a way better answer that doesn’t care at all about corporate or investment interests. It is called the Right to Work. I would support that a lot more than Universal Basic income. With a Right to Work, it is your pleasure to service society you are choosing it and you and entitled to flexible work conditions. With Universal Basic Income, you just get cash.
Honestly, I have heard the argument for Universal Basic Income and how we are on the path to being able to have Automated Communism. Listen to me when I say. In every version of Socialism & Capitalism that fails. It has a lot to do with under regulation and under participation. If you really think about Socialism & Capitalism. What is the real value? The value is in how many people are going to cooperate with the system. How well does it keep society in check?
In this society, we dream of where everyone gets free money. No one except the essential few has to work. It is not a dream! It is a nightmare! North Americans as a whole are not quiet & responsible people. So here is what happens? Addiction goes crazy, obesity goes up & GDP goes way too far down. That is the automated Communist/Capitalist dystopia in a nutshell.
Here is my problem with the state of unskilled labor and how it is being viewed in society currently. True or false low education is directly related to the crime rate? We need to see the obvious flaw in the current system and in Universal Basic income as it relates to unskilled laborers. These really are dangerous & I am sorry sometimes idiotic people we really should be keeping busy for 8 hours a day. It is called The Right to Work. Some have referred to it as Workfare. I don’t care what you call it.
I don’t care who pays for it. I don’t care how we achieve it. The point of The Right to work is this. Not participating in society has disastrous effects on someone’s mind. Like it or not? People aren’t going to take their Universal Basic income and read poetry all day. There is a bigger chance they take that money and do a lot of stupid stuff. However, with a job to return to tomorrow. Maybe we lessen the possibility of free time for stupidity?