A Simple Answer to a Stupid Dilemma

As I’ve discussed before, as election season approaches and every voter faces the prospect of looking at what they have (or haven’t) done, many are facing this moment of truth with wailing, gnashing of teeth, wearing of hair shirts and public penitent flagellation. Today’s example is as follows:

The time has come again for the liberals to attack those on their left. Such things are cyclical, like the coming of the cicadas. This is interesting timing because the liberals I know and read are very, very confident that Obama is running away with the election. And this itself is interesting, as the typical justification of the rampant redbaiting and Peter Beinart-style calls for purges of the unfaithful is that we’re in a trench war, here, people, and Charlie is everywhere, and so if the Democrats were to nominate Zell Miller your job would be to shut the fuck up and support him as he destroyed everything we believe in, because it’s a two party system. But, now, see, because they think that their guy is winning, it’s also not the right time because… well. You know. It’s never the time. They are, in every sense, kept people, owned by a party and its leader, and they have given away every part of themselves that is capable of critical thought.

I don’t know how else it say it, considering I’ve said it a thousand times. I want my country to stop killing innocent people. I want it so bad I don’t know how to act or what to do. I want it so bad I can’t sit still or sleep at night. I want it with everything I have that’s capable of want. And I know that this is the kind of talk that invites pure contempt from those like Tbogg, who have only the idiom of sarcasm and derision and cannot imagine straightforward moral sentiment. But that’s the truth. I want my country to stop killing innocent people. And the innocent people we kill the most, these days, are Muslim. And the policy of the Obama administration has expanded the zone in which we kill innocent Muslims, they have shown no interest in stopping killing innocent Muslims, and in fact their campaign constantly brags about the drone program which kills innocent Muslims. That’s just true. All of it is just true. Obama is directly responsible for the expansion of hostilities against Muslims targets which result in the death of people who have taken no violent action against the United States. Voting for him cannot, does not, and will not challenge that reality.

I don’t know who is telling him not to challenge this outside of the voting booth, because that’s a stupid thing to say (and I believe him that people are saying this; I’ve gotten shit myself for not being sufficiently pro-Obama), but guess what: politicians have absolutely no way of connecting your motives for (not) voting as you choose to with the outcome of the election. It’s a stupid, pointless gesture to not-vote in protest unless your sole goal is to make yourself feel good, unless you don’t live in a swing state. I live in VA, so this race is very contested here. If you live in state that’s heavily weighted one way or another, then feel free to sit it out (or better yet, vote for a third-party candidate), but the action will be meaningless without more action outside of election season to back it up. To paraphrase Noam Chomsky in the video below, of course you can fucking vote for the lesser of two evils, because you get less goddamn evil!

And let’s get back to this little gem from the comment above, because I want to highlight it:

I don’t know how else it say it, considering I’ve said it a thousand times. I want my country to stop killing innocent people. I want it so bad I don’t know how to act or what to do.

I’m sure these people could use some help. Or these people. Do you vote in your primary elections? Do you donate money outside of election season (and include a note as to why you’re donating or why it’s not more, or why you’re donating a goddamn penny because you’re so pissed off)? If you don’t know how to act or what to do, then ask people who are doing something and be willing to follow through. Find some way to help and do it, but don’t pretend that casting a ballot is the time to make that difference. From my earlier post:

Think of it this way. You’re on a large train, and the track divides at regular intervals. During the ride, you can contact people who are building the line ahead of you to influence the way the tracks are going to go, but once the tracks are built, nothing can change them short of a natural disaster. Just before you get to the switch where you can go in one (or more) possible directions, everyone on the train gets a vote as to which way the train will go. No matter what you do the train is going on one of the tracks that have already been laid out. If you wanted a different option, your only time to influence it was the long ride before the vote (write-in candidates just do not win without considerable groundwork; think of Lisa Murkowski in Alaska). Whether you spent this time slamming down drinks in the lounge car or frantically calling ahead to try and change the direction the rails are being laid out, at this point it doesn’t matter. The options have now been decided, and the train is not going to stop. With considerable difficulty you can get off the train, but that can be a complex (and sometimes dangerous) process that can be hard to reverse if you change your mind, but the train will not stop.

So the question on a ballot is, “which way will the train go?”

And once again DJW’s re-telling of hilzoy’s wonderful response:

I can’t recall when or where, but I believe it was hilzoy who gave the best answer I’ve ever heard to this kind of question, which I wholeheartedly endorse. It was, essentially, that she would be indifferent to voting for the least bad viable candidate when things had gotten so bad that she was actively involved in violent rebellion against the government. Significantly, this is a higher threshold than “things are so bad violent revolution is justified in the abstract, but I’m not currently doing it”, but actual active rebellion. This seems exactly right to me. Either you should use the tools available to make better/reduce the harm of the current state, of you should begin engaging in a plot to overthrow it, or find a way to contribute to an ongoing one. If the latter is not to your taste because you have other priorities, or you (probably wisely) deem it unlikely to be unsuccessful and as such not a reasonable risk of life and limb, you have no reason to avoid the first strategy, and you get no credit for moral high ground for avoiding it.

And if those are too complicated for you, then I offer you the simple, traditional response: “don’t mourn, organize!

Posted in Activism, Elections, Living in the real world, Posts That Will Get Me Hate Mail, Self-determination, So how do we fix it? Tagged , , ,

The First Thunderf00t PEARL-Clutching Award

I’ve written two posts about the piece by Conor Friedersdorf titled “Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama.” Now many other people have said much more coherent things than I have about this, and Mr. Friedersdorf has better things to do than read my blog, but in his latest reaction to the furor he got in response, he seems to have done something I see a lot of human beings do: ignore the criticism that is directed at the emotional core of his argument. His first paragraph below the jump (emphasis mine):
Continue reading

Posted in Activism, Bad Media! Bad!, Boy You Suck, Education, Elections, Green Lantern Theory, So how do we fix it?, Stupid Power Tricks, WTF? Tagged , , , , , ,

Immaturity and Intellectual Sloth? Really?

I just saw a post over at Sacerdotus that saddens me. I’m not going to excerpt it because of the explicitly-stated licensing conditions on the front page, but it’s a brief read, and I suggest you take a look at it now.

The post is titled “With Age Comes Wisdom,” which was based on an article that Sacerdotus read at The Huffington Post, which I will excerpt from after the jump:
Continue reading

Posted in Atheism(n), Bad Science Reporting, Boy You Suck, It Would Be Irresponsible Not To Speculate, Posts That Will Get Me Hate Mail, Sometimes I Just Do It To Piss People Off Tagged , , , , ,

I Have No Argument Against the Tax-Exempt Status of Churches.

I don’t need one either, because the churches make them for me.

Image added for the purpose of extra outrage expression.

Posted in Activism, Boy You Suck, Education, Elections, Fuck Your Team, Fundamentalism on the March, It Would Be Irresponsible Not To Speculate, Posts That Will Get Me Hate Mail, Self-determination, So how do we fix it?, Sometimes I Just Do It To Piss People Off, Stupid Power Tricks, WTF? Tagged , , , , , ,

Utilitarianism and Voting

Scott Lemieux, Paul Campos, and Erik Loomis talk about some of the reaction to the post I talked about yesterday, in which Conor Friedersdorf said he could not in good conscience vote for Obama. Apparently they are getting a lot of grief for it from people who feel that the ballot box is the appropriate place to express moral outrage (when actually it’s the place to put the punctuation on whatever political opinions you’ve expressed and acted on for the entire rest of the time you aren’t in the voting booth. People confuse me.

Continue reading

Posted in Boy You Suck, Elections, Green Lantern Theory, Living in the real world, Posts That Will Get Me Hate Mail, Self-determination, When the Internet and RL Collide Tagged , , , , , , ,

Activism on Election Day Is Too Late

Conor Friedersdorf doesn’t want to cast a vote for Obama despite doing so in 2008, and the reason can be summed up as “Obama has done things that violate my core principles, especially those principles which motivated me to vote for him in the first place.” He’s mostly speaking of the civil liberties fail, the cracking down on whistle blowers, and the drone war. He lays out a pretty good case for it as far as these things go, summing it up with this:
Continue reading

Posted in Activism, Green Lantern Theory, In which I think too much, Living in the real world, OMFGWTFIRL, Self-determination, So how do we fix it?, Stupid Power Tricks Tagged , , , , , ,

The Anachronism of the Gold Standard

There’s a saying that’s famous among physicists: “That’s not even wrong.” The idea is that an answer or theory is so far afield that not only can it not be falsified, it ignores the foundational conditions of the situation it addresses so completely that it can not even be addressed within the context of reality as we know it. Such a proposition is the current GOP goal of returning to the Gold Standard, a favorite of Gold Bugs and economic reactionaries everywhere. I want to try and take it apart for you so you can understand just a bit about how far afield the idea is as a systematic basis for a major economy in the world today. To open up in favor of the gold standard, we have ShaneDK of YouTube, who in a 2009 reply to one statement by the Amazing Atheist, attempts to explain what money is (and in so doing explain how actual money is pretty much equivalent to a gold-backed currency). So without further ado, here you go:

Now I went to the effort of transcribing this video so I could properly address the arguments therein, so this post is going to be very long and somewhat dry (though my ill-tempered humor will no doubt shine through). For those of you that don’t feel like sitting through and reading the whole thing, here’s the shorter version (but if you want to argue with the shorter without reading the whole post and its arguments, I’m not certain I’ll be interested in replying unless you’re some kind of economic super-genius). To sum up, here is the basic rebuttal to the arguments for a gold standard in the U.S., which contains its own refutation:

HEY! You remember those days where you had to make every piece of a complicated device by hand, and assemble them together one at a time? You remember that, when you couldn’t just buy a spare part when something broke but had to make it by hand too, because the spare parts weren’t interchangeable because everything was individually made? THOSE DAYS WERE AWESOME, AND WE SHOULD TOTALLY GO BACK TO THEM! What? You mean we couldn’t have computers or the Internet to have these debates if we did that? Sure we could! The computers would just be more valuable, and everything would be more stable and efficient, and everyone would care about their computers more and use them for more important things! Hey, don’t laugh at me! Come back here!

The long complex argument below the jump; I will be linking to gold-friendly sources where possible.

Continue reading

Posted in Deep Thought, Education, It Would Be Irresponsible Not To Speculate, Stupid Power Tricks, The Consequences of Finance Tagged , , , , ,

The GOP’s Fundamental Policy Error

Much metaphorical ink has been used writing about Romney talking to his people (rather than YOU people) and things just keep getting worse. I would be remiss in failing to point out how The Daily Show and The Colbert Report both ripped into him, and highly recommend them.1 Still, I am reminded of two sobering conversations I had in 2008 during the run-up to the election.

Continue reading

Posted in Activism, Boy You Suck, Fuck Your Team, In which I think too much, Living in the real world, Posts That Will Get Me Hate Mail, Self-determination, Stupid Power Tricks, The Consequences of Finance, The Peter Principle Tagged , , , , , ,

Student Loan Debt Is Terrifying

I’ve been worried about student loan debt for a while, and have been waiting for it to create the next big bubble (and noting that EU sovereign debt is forming another potential bubble by shifting the debts of the member states onto the European Central Bank), mostly ranting about them in my BlogTVs (with a scotch in one hand and a bunch of ire in the other). Still, I must amend my previous advice. Via Mike Shedlock1, we find an NYT info piece that refers to the crazy amount of outstanding student debt that’s been created: “Bad Student Debt Stubbornly High as Collection Efforts Surge.” Forget about Mish’s analysis of this (he thinks that frigging Pell grants are part of the problem, forget about how one in six lenders is making up just over 7 percent of the bankruptcies by value2, and look at these two frigging graphs (it would have been nice if Mish had set them side by side, but they tell an inconvenient story that way.

Continue reading

Posted in Deep Thought, Education, Self-determination, So how do we fix it?, Stupid Power Tricks, The Consequences of Finance, The Peter Principle Tagged , , , ,

A Sign You Need to Reconsider Things….

This doesn’t look good…

PORTLAND, Ore. — Paul Ryan crossed party lines and voiced support for one of President Obama’s biggest backers today, saying, “We stand with Mayor Rahm Emanuel” in his fight with Chicago’s teachers, which led the union to call the city’s first teachers’ strike in 25 years.

“If you turned on the TV this morning or sometime today, you probably saw something about the Chicago teacher’s union strike,” Ryan said at fundraiser at the Governor Hotel here. “I’ve known Rahm Emanuel for years. He’s a former colleague of mine. Rahm and I have not agreed on every issue or on a lot of issues, but Mayor Emanuel is right today in saying that this teacher’s union strike is unnecessary and wrong. We know that Rahm is not going to support our campaign, but on this issue and this day we stand with Mayor Rahm Emanuel.”

With almost any other Democrat, I’d say that a reevaluation might be in order, but this this is Rahm Emmanuel we’re talking about (” target=”_blank”>cue my favorite Rahm link). I hope the rest of the party notices the implicit message involved when one of your most fervent ideological opponents cheers you on for fighting with your party’s base.

via Naked Capitalism.

Posted in Activism, Boy You Suck, Stupid Power Tricks, The Consequences of Finance Tagged , , , ,