Russell Brand and another WTF OP/ED

[Brian37]

@/Ben Davis
Well I'm gonna go for option 2, obviously
To be honest, there are good reasons/arguments for both options.

But here's the thing: Yes, labour did some good things whilst in power and it looks to me like Cameron has hired the labour campaign organisers to be his cabinet ministers. But the way things are, I will never vote for labour, simply because I remember why they were voted out of power. Likewise, I could never vote tory for much the same reason.

To be perfectly honest, I've seen what they're like in the house of commons. It's like watching a class of bickering 5 year olds when the teacher has left the room. They make the worst net troll look like a thoughtful, seasoned debater in comparison.

Gridlock does not excuse you the voter of doing nothing. "They're both crap" is bullshit. Get in the game with your voice at a minimum, or run for office or create that third party. "I am not voting" is as useful as praying to a god, it does absolutely NOTHING.

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

Gridlock does not excuse you the voter of doing nothing. "They're both crap" is bullshit. Get in the game with your voice at a minimum, or run for office or create that third party. "I am not voting" is as useful as praying to a god, it does absolutely NOTHING.

I'm starting to get déjà vu. I've already given my response to that and you haven't even tried to tell my why it's wrong. If you can, please do so. If you can convince me that my position is wrong then I will thank you for it. But repeating the same line over and over, without addressing my response is something I would expect from a creationist

[Brian37]

Gridlock does not excuse you the voter of doing nothing. "They're both crap" is bullshit. Get in the game with your voice at a minimum, or run for office or create that third party. "I am not voting" is as useful as praying to a god, it does absolutely NOTHING.

I'm starting to get déjà vu. I've already given my response to that and you haven't even tried to tell my why it's wrong. If you can, please do so. If you can convince me that my position is wrong then I will thank you for it. But repeating the same line over and over, without addressing my response is something I would expect from a creationist

Not voting is the same as ignoring and doing nothing. Voting has to be a part of good governance, it should not be the only tool, and like any other human venture, it can go off the rails. Vigilance and participation and checks on ALL power, including voters.

Do nothing, get nothing. Trying and failing is better than doing nothing.

Anyone who wants to postulate a better system can give it a go, but it is still human run and would still be subject to the same potential abuse precisely because humans are capable of BOTH compassion and cruelty. Change does not insure that the change will be good, or even stay good long term.

[frankiej]

Not voting is the same as ignoring and doing nothing.

You haven't been answering anyone's questions other than saying they are dumb or ignorant for not voting, please show why this is the case. Who can I possibly vote for when I consider the politicians of the main parties to be scum? If I were to vote, then I would be voting for someone I don't want in government. Please explain how not wanting that makes me ignorant.

And I'll scream if you just say I should start my own party. That is no solution. Running costs money, starting a party costs money. Money drives politics. You can't just say to a non-voter that they should try and change the system that way when most of said people can't afford it. Your "solution" is fucking garbage and made up nonsense.

[Optimistic Mysanthrope]

Ok, this isn't getting us anywhere so I'll try re-wording my position.

Let's say there are 4 viable candidates for an election. All candidates have a few policies that I agree with, at least on principle. However, all 4 candidates also support different policies that I vehemently oppose.

I cast my vote on the principle of choosing the lesser evil. That candidate gets elected and the policy which I oppose gets enacted.

Now I don't know about you, but no matter how I try to justify it to myself, I would consider myself partially responsible. You can call it lazy, stupid or whatever. I don't care. I point blank refuse to be complicit in the election of a candidate that I oppose.

Now before you say, I don't have the time and resources to stand as a candidate and mount an effective election campaign. It simply isn't a viable option.

Edited due to incompetence

[Brian37]

Not voting is the same as ignoring and doing nothing.

You haven't been answering anyone's questions other than saying they are dumb or ignorant for not voting, please show why this is the case. Who can I possibly vote for when I consider the politicians of the main parties to be scum? If I were to vote, then I would be voting for someone I don't want in government. Please explain how not wanting that makes me ignorant.

And I'll scream if you just say I should start my own party. That is no solution. Running costs money, starting a party costs money. Money drives politics. You can't just say to a non-voter that they should try and change the system that way when most of said people can't afford it. Your "solution" is fucking garbage and made up nonsense.

Um you know, there are morons still today who claim that being an open atheist won't change things. I call bullshit on that every single time because I know having been online every single day for the past 12 years how small the voice was then and how it has exploded today. The none's and atheists are have the fastest pace ratio wise of growth

You may not be able to by yourself, but grass roots start local and small and grow. If you expect overnight change you are an idiot. You've got the entire world on the internet, to appeal to, so a simple connection to the internet sends your voice anywhere you want to post it.