Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
OldGrayBob

How Should An Objectivist Vote?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

I have noticed in a number of threads commenting about voting. In the past twenty years since being locked out of the Wisconsin 2nd District Democratic Caucus in 1984, I have been refining my method of voting. I think that my method may appeal to some Objectivist. The method I used is based on a method described by Robert Heinlein in his novel Time Enough for Love. Very simply, research all the candidates and rank them in the order of who will do the most damage to your ideals. From this you can develop a list of which you want to vote against. This can vary for the different elections, i.e., in the primary, you might vote for Kerry over Dean because you see Dean as the bigger threat. Later you might vote for Bush over Kerry because Kerry is the bigger threat to you ideals. (I am using Bush, Kerry, and Dean only as examples, I am not stating that you should vote for any of these hotdogs.) One more thing, never vote for a nonviable candidate when voting against some one, vote for some one who might make it. Finally, never vote for candidates in uncontested races, their egos are big enough without adding to it.

Sorry if I sound cynical, but I live just outside of Madison, Wisconsin, where new-age liberalism reigns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry if I sound cynical, but I live just outside of Madison, Wisconsin, where new-age liberalism reigns.

What's Paul Soglin up to these days?

Around 1970, when he was head of the local SDS, I debated him on a panel in front of a throng of maybe 1,000 of his supporters. I left Madison in 1972 and I was quite surprised to learn that he then became mayor.

Btw, I was in Madison when they blew up the Math-Science Bldg. I actually heard the explosion. When I was studying for my Masters exams in my rooming house on Bassett St. (right across from the football stadium) the police were teargassing rioting students right outside my window!

Quite a period.

(We had formed a group, CDIR - Committee to Defend Individual Rights - to oppose the SDS. There were all of about a dozen of us but we got a lot of play way out of proportion to our numbers. I learned a lot from the experience.)

Fred Weiss

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How Should An Objectivist Vote?

Major Premise: All mortals should vote their conscience.

Minor Premise: An Objectivists is a mortal.

Conclusion: An Objectivists should vote his conscience.

(I just thought I'd bring the age-old archetype up to date.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah, but is that practical, Xanadu? If you don't vote, and disaster strikes, and New York's lights go out, will your position be, "but I couldn't help it, the perfect candidate didn't run!"?

No, it is not practical. And by that statement, I mean to imply: it is not moral.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A absurd as it may sound; as a democracy if you cannot vote for a standing candidate then it is your duty for you to stand for those policy's you feel a perfect leader would represent.

If someone from this board was to stand, an objectivist - would you not vote for him? or would you vote for the lesser of two evils?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As absurd as it may sound; as a democracy if you cannot vote for a standing candidate then it is your duty for you to stand for those policy's you feel a perfect leader would represent.

Why? And why is it your duty rather than to your self-interest?

If someone from this board was to stand, an objectivist - would you not vote for him? or would you vote for the lesser of two evils?

That would depend on whether he had a real chance of being elected. If the only electable candidates were the "evils," a vote for anyone else would be wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hint, hint: I would love to see someone write a FAQ on this for the wiki, so we could just link newbie’s to it in the future…

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
QUOTE (Charles @ Jul 11 2004, 12:14 AM)

As absurd as it may sound; as a democracy if you cannot vote for a standing candidate then it is your duty for you to stand for those policy's you feel a perfect leader would represent. 

Why? And why is it your duty rather than to your self-interest?

Not rather than; it is a mattter of duty because in a democratic state the only way you are going to uphold your ideals of individuality and freedom to be self- interested in the longterm (as far a voting is concerned) is to stand yourself; that is if no other government candidate comes even close to your position.

Im not advocating duty as defined in terms of democracy, i haven't put forward support for democracy. Im simply talking about the necessary measures to be taken in liu of ones ideals when voting in a country that pertains to be democratic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hint, hint

GreedyCapitalist = pseudo-objectivist

They are synonyms.

Where did that even come from? Is it something I said or do you object to my nickname?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a joke.  Sorry I forgot to put "Just Kidding"

I guess it wasn't as obvious as I estimated

Sorry

I'm sorry, but I still don't get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is immoral to vote! Why retain or vote in another socialist? These "politicians" only differ in their degree and kind of socialism. One advocates looting through welfare while the other protectionism. Why admire or support those who seek to plunder us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is immoral to vote!  Why retain or vote in another socialist?  These "politicians" only differ in their degree and kind of socialism.

Yes, but some socialists will buy us more time than other socialists and we can use that time to make the necessary revolutionary changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, but some socialists will buy us more time than other socialists and we can use that time to make the necessary revolutionary changes.

Unfortunately true. Both parties lead the road to hell, just one happens to be the express lane.

Why could the question not be posed as 'which candidated best represents the free market and capitalism and defends each (along with property rights et al)?'

I understand Rand's take on it...i don't need to be versed on it again and again, but as a necessity to slow the progression towards communism, should it be important to vote regardless of the evils/altruism of political parties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both parties lead the road to hell, just one happens to be the express lane.

Why could the question not be posed as 'which candidate best represents the free market and capitalism and defends each (along with property rights et al)?'

Because that is not a realistic choice ... yet.

I understand Rand's take on it...i don't need to be versed on it again and again, but as a necessity to slow the progression towards communism, should it be important to vote regardless of the evils/altruism of political parties?

Certainly, if the vote might make a difference -- as in the slow lane versus the express lane to hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the Libertarian Party may lack the Objectivist premise for political philosophy however "evil" they have been purported to be by the Ayn Rand Institute, they are the most congruent in our belief of limited governance. I am closely coming to terms with anarcho-capitalism but lets give this limited government a try and vote Libertarian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although the Libertarian Party may lack the Objectivist premise for political philosophy however "evil" they have been purported to be by the Ayn Rand Institute, they are the most congruent in our belief of limited governance.  I am closely coming to terms with anarcho-capitalism but lets give this limited government a try and vote Libertarian.

Even "judge not" groups like TOC are having problems with how odd the libertarians are. Could you give a few examples of ARI's false statements about the Libertarian Party.

Does this mean you think the Libertarian Party is anarcho-capitalism or not? The but in your last sentence implies that anarcho-capitalism is not for limited government. So are you voting for the Libertarians because their against your ideas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“if you saw Atlas, the giant who holds the world on his shoulders, if you saw that he stood blood running down his chest, his knees buckling, his arms trembling but still trying to hold the world aloft with the last of his strength, and the greater his effort the harder the world bore down upon his shoulders---- what would you tell him to do?”

My world; this country, has bore down on me long enough. I will no longer be a party to my own demise. I will not select the instrument of my execution simply to buy time. It makes little difference to me whether I’m killed abroad in a war I don’t condone, or am slowly tax to death here at home. By making a choice, by “picking your poison” you do little more than participate in game the will kill you. Now or later is the choice you long to make? Not me. For those who do choose the “’lesser of two evils” (as you’ve put it) as if it’s your duty, your Atlas will never shrug. He will simply die while picking the slowest way to do it.

The only participation I will give this government will be forced, i.e. the IRS.

I’d rather not help rationalize and conceal their idiocy by taking part.

But that’s just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally make a list of priorities on the issues in the campaign. For instance, most important to least

Defense, War on Terror

Taxes, Who would decrease

Abortion, Pro-Choice (or "Life")

Then I'd look at the stances of the candidates. I would give more points to the candidate with my view on defense, and less points for abortion (I'm a guy, it isn't that important).

Total it up and then ask yourself "do I like this guy's character?"

TB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...