To Vote, or Not to Vote...

Less of a Question and More of a Mope?

Sep 11, 2024

I Get It

I was home for the summer after my first year of college. And I was decidedly unimpressed with my college experience so far. So far, from what I was experiencing, college and education were having little to do with one another.

Thanks for reading Rant Against the Regime! This post is public so feel free to share it.

My Dad was worried, of course. We were having long, not-fun conversations about the value of getting a college education. About how I should be patient. How I should keep giving college a try. Not at all an unreasonable parental point of view.

In one of those many unfun conversations, my father said to me, “Son, a college degree is like a passport into our society.” I responded instantly, in what I thought a pithy comeback, “Dad, I’m not sure I want into our society.”

Simultaneously, that was one of the truest and stupidest things I’ve ever said in my life.

So I get it, Uncommitted voters—especially young Uncommitted voters. I really do get it.

The limitations of the two-party system sucks. The binary opposition of Democrat/Republican sucks. The Electoral College creating the absurdity of a few “battleground states” sucks. Sleazy Billionaires and huge Corporations and shit-for-brain organizations like the NRA flooding our politics with cash to get what they want sucks.

Systemic racial and gender and sexual (and a host of other Others) inequality sucks. Religious zealots abolishing reproductive rights and banning books sucks. Halfwit politicians spouting meaningless platitudes, personal insults, abject nonsense, and outright lies sucks.

The Defense Industry saturating the world with weapons sucks. Allowing and fostering the sin against humanity of acute wealth inequality sucks. Criminally and suicidally ignoring the hammer of Climate Change now coming down on all of our heads SUCKS.

Maybe to sum it all up, neoliberalism sucks.

I get it, Uncommitted voters—especially young Uncommitted voters. I really do get it.

I’ve been there myself.

But...

But here’s what I want to say to you. Here are two thoughts I’d like to toss your way. Simply for your consideration. As a bit of food for thought.

And, to be very clear, these are NOT notions that I consider to be TRUTHS. I am NOT saying here that I’m right/you’re wrong. (See what I did with that binary?) There is SO much gray area and room for intelligent conversation on this issue.

And, more than anything else, I am NOT looking to portray myself as some kind of Wise Old Man. That would be stupid. That would only give you, young folks, the opportunity to reply to me quite justifiably: “OK boomer.”

But, nevertheless, caveats said and done, here are two thoughts I’d like to offer.

Thought #1: Not voting is not a form of voting.
Thought #2: Vote for candidates who are at least moving in the political direction you want things to go.

Let me elaborate.

Thought #1

Not voting is not a form of voting.

It’s hard not to think that being a no-show at the voting booth is, in practical terms, an act of self-inflicted futility. The only real impact it has is helping the candidate you like the least win the election. And won’t that just send you deeper into your political malaise?

Or, if you dislike both candidates equally, you’re just checking yourself out of the political system altogether. Which makes you both powerless and irrelevant. And isn’t that what got you into your political malaise in the first place?

Maybe you’re planning a violent overthrow of the status quo. Not impossible, but it takes a lot of doing. Are you working on this during your weekends?

Or maybe, more reasonably, you’re looking to mold the status quo into something different. Something more to your political liking such as, say, proportional representation replacing the idiotic Electoral College. While on the downside such an effort takes time, on the upside it doesn’t involve weaponry and storming the Capitol Building.

It usually does, however, involve voting (see Thought #2 below).

Or maybe you’re considering casting a “protest vote” for a third-party candidate. Such an opportunity pops up from time to time in our presidential elections. It goes without saying, of course, that third-party candidates never have a snowball’s chance in Hell of winning. So you’re not voting for anyone you really can have governing you. Rather, you’re throwing something of a tantrum—as is the third-party candidate her- or himself—because you can’t instantly get what you politically want.

Moreover, whether that third-party candidate is someone genuinely to be admired or some weirdo crackpot, the effect is the same. That person is a mere spoiler for one of the two major-party candidates. Most likely the major-party candidate you like a bit more than the other major-party candidate. So, just like being a no-show at the polls and not voting at all, all you’re accomplishing is helping the candidate you like the least win the election. And we’re right back to your political malaise problem.

In sum, then, not voting is not a particularly effective way to get your point across, your dissatisfactions expressed, and your voice heard. No one listens all that closely to silence. Especially not in the shouting match of a political campaign and the numbers game of a vote tally.

Neither is going with a third-party candidate all that useful. Such candidates either never had or have foregone the backing and support of a major party—i.e. the money, network, and support necessary to be a viable political player. Thus, you’re voting for someone with zero clout beyond monkey wrench.

So what’s your point?

I hate to say it, but it strikes me that not voting or third-party candidate voting comes across more as empty virtue signaling than as meaningful principled stand. It seems to be a short-sighted attempt to appear far-sighted. A bit of a privileged self-indulgence. It’s like you’re saying: Hey, I’m well-off enough in my personal circumstances that it doesn’t really matter which of the major-party candidates wins. I’ll be fine.

Is this an honorable political outlook?

Lots of folks fought hard to get the vote…

Thought #2

Vote for candidates who are at least moving in the political direction you want things to go.

Now, this idea might sound like a distasteful and unacceptable compromise to you, but, please, hear me out. There is a second part to Thought #2. It’s this:

Vote for these less-than-perfect candidates—then push them to move further in the political direction you want things to go.

(I’ll add a disclaimer here as well: if that political direction is toward increased democracy and social-economic justice. If democracy and social-economic justice aren’t your cup of tea, well, you’re better off not reading any more of this post. Tune into Fox News or Newsmax instead where you’ll hear all the lies you want to hear.)

My point is this. Yours does not need to be a vote of surrender or compromise if you’re willing to augment your vote with political actions.

There are a number of ways to take action to push your agenda within a major party. Donations to and working for candidates who mostly represent your views and values are two ways that jump to mind. Making your views known to your state and federal representatives is another straightforward step to take. To get more deeply involved, join or organize groups of fellow voters who share your politics then press your case to the major party and even put forward candidates of your own.

Remember, you have something that major party needs: Your Vote. Make them earn it.

But make no mistake. It will take time. Overnight success when influencing major party policy is rare. But influence is happening all the time.

It’s not easy pushing things in the direction you want them to go

Examples Speak Louder than Assertions

Let’s consider a crucial and ongoing example of an effort to influence major party policy: the war in Gaza and the Uncommitted vote in the Democratic primaries.

First let me make clear my position on the situation in Gaza. Please understand that I have no specialized knowledge in the area of international affairs or any profound insights into these awful events. Mine are but impressions formed by keeping abreast of the news—news acquired from media sources with a demonstrated record of journalistic integrity, many of them non-profit. Briefly, then, my stance on Gaza is as follows.

Yes, Israel has the right to defend itself and to retaliate for the horrific and despicable attacks carried out by Hamas nearly a year ago. No, Israel does not have the right to carry out its retaliation against Hamas by indiscriminately killing over 40,000 innocent Palestinian civilians and leveling the Gaza Strip. These are horrific and despicable acts. War crimes that Israel—perhaps more than any other nation on earth—should know better than to pursue. At the same time, I know that there are many, many Israeli citizens who do not support this war, who want an immediate and permanent ceasefire, and who prioritize the return of all hostages taken by Hamas.

As for our own domestic politics, yes, like many Americans I am frustrated and baffled by Joe Biden’s not suspending shipments of offensive weapons to Israel. Even if something of a token gesture (I’m sure Israel has great stockpiles of offensive weapons), such a measure would send a strong message to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end his brutal campaign. And finally, yes, like many Americans I suspect and am hopeful that Kamala Harris will deal more forcibly with Netanyahu, who in my view is a war criminal no better than Vladimir Putin.

Again, these are my inexpert opinions on this terrible war. I’m also fully aware that for decades the Palestine-Israel situation has been one of the most complex and distressing problems facing the post-World War II world.

Let’s turn now to the Uncommitted vote in the recent Democratic primaries as a protest to Biden’s response to the Gaza War.

As an example of working to influence the policies of a major political party, the Uncommitted primary vote is nothing short of brilliant.

Those voters who organized the Uncommitted movement understand that the Democrats need their votes, especially in a state like Michigan. Well, by convincing so many primary voters to mark their ballots Uncommitted, these organizers have sent an unmistakable message to the Democrats. In order to earn back these Uncommitted voters for the general election, the current policy toward Israel’s aggression in Gaza must change.

And their strategy has worked. The Gaza War has become a prominent campaign issue. One that, as always, the Republicans cynically are trying to exploit. More important, one that the Democrats genuinely must address.

And there you have it: actual political influence in the form of pushing a major party in the political direction you want things to go.

At this point I’ll point out the very obvious. The organizers of the Uncommitted movement DID NOT accomplish their political goals BY NOT VOTING. Just the opposite. They used voting to accomplish their political goals.

In other words, to influence the system you must work within the system. In this case, using the Uncommitted voting option in presidential primaries, which in some state Democratic primaries might result in sending a number of Uncommitted delegates to the party convention, turns out to be a powerful way to send a warning shot across the bow of the Democratic Party.

However...

Now that I’ve provided an excellent example of what TO DO with regard to Thought #2, I’ll provide an equally excellent example of what NOT TO DO with regard to Thought #1.

Namely: It would be a tragic mistake for these Uncommitted primary voters to sit out the 2024 presidential election.

As I contend above, not voting is not a form of voting, of making your voice heard. Not voting only makes your voice absent, reducing you to a non-player. When it comes to the possibility of Uncommitted primary voters not voting in the presidential election, I see at least two key reasons why their inaction would be tragic.

Reason 1: Such an action would undo the amazing work of political influencing you just accomplished. By this I mean it would show the Democratic Party that you’re not really serious about changing the current U.S. policy for sending arms to Israel. That you’re not in this political struggle for the long haul. All you’re really willing to do, I hate to say, is stomp your feet and pout about not instantly getting your way.

Engaging in meaningful political change means being willing to engage in the fight for as long as it takes. Therefore, now that you have the full attention of the Democratic Party, push your advantage. Press the next administration—the Harris administration—for even more meaningful change.

Reason 2: such an action might well doom the Palestinian people—the very people you’re trying to help. By this I mean your non-votes could open the door for Trump winning the election by way of tiny margins in vital swing states. Needless to say, another Trump administration would be an unmitigated disaster in numberless ways. One disaster you can be sure of, however, is Trump giving free rein to Netanyahu to destroy Gaza, to seize the West Bank, and conceivably to drive Palestinians completely and permanently out of their homeland.

What else does it look like Netanyahu is doing with his scorched-earth strategy in Gaza?

During his presidency, Trump did nothing in the way of encouraging, let alone pursuing, the Two-State Solution. Instead, Trump did everything he could to facilitate Netanyahu’s, in effect, One-State Solution—that is, the rightwing faction of Israel running roughshod over the Palestinian people and territories.

For starters in 2018, in a move intended mainly to please his evangelical American base, Trump relocated the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. By doing so, he exacerbated an already volatile regional controversy about the rightful capital city of Israel. Trump’s actions outraged the Palestinians and clearly signaled his siding with Israel. Then in 2020, after much delay, Trump rolled out his “Peace and Prosperity” plan intended to solve, once and for all, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. With his usual hyperbolic stupidity, Trump hailed his plan as “the deal of the century.” Of course it flopped. Not only did the plan heavily favor Israel, but it was negotiated without any Palestinians being at the table or even consulted.

Currently and unsurprisingly, Netanyahu and Trump are in cahoots to keep each other out of jail. By way of prolonging indefinitely the Gaza War, Netanyahu remains in power as a war-time Prime Minister, thus evading the criminal indictments against him for breach of trust, accepting bribes, and fraud. Similarly, by getting himself re-elected (with ample help from his MAGA members of Congress), Trump would evade the two federal indictments and, possibly, the two state indictments against him totaling over 80 criminal offenses.

Let’s face it. All of the above facts do not point to a bright future for the Palestinian people under a second Trump regime.

Like Putin in Ukraine, Netanyahu in Gaza is showing himself for what he is: an anti-democratic, nuclear-armed, authoritarian thug. If re-elected, Trump plans to become just such a thug. Therefore, unless you want to see Jared Kushner developing the Gaza Strip into a line of swanky beachfront resorts, you better get out the vote for Kamala Harris.

Fair warning here.

I Got It...Eventually

Eventually, after graduating from college and experiencing the larger world, I came to realize that working within the system does not inevitably mean capitulating to the system. If done well, with insight and persistence, it can mean changing the system. Even subverting it into something you consider far better.

Yes, rules are made to be broken. Systems are constructed to be deconstructed and then reconstructed. Over and over. That’s how human culture operates.

Of course, nothing guarantees that your efforts to change the system will work. Likely more often than not they won’t, or they’ll be blunted. Still, does that mean you quit? I hope not.

Of course, others will be attempting to change the system into something you consider worse. Maybe far worse. For example, for decades the American rightwing has been working to rig the system in their favor and to reflect their worldview. Tax codes, voter suppression laws, banning abortion, busting unions, stacking the Supreme Court. And so on.

I don’t know about you, but I think that such changes are designed to oppress, to exclude, and to exploit.

Now the even more extreme MAGA movement has decided that the U.S. Constitution is a bothersome document standing in the way of their authoritarian agenda. Best now to toss it aside. Appoint a good dictator. Make Donald J. Trump our Thug-in-Chief for life.

Again, I don’t know about you, but I don’t think this will be a positive change to our system.

Dear Uncommitted voters, now is the time for fight, not flight.

The struggle for democracy, for social and economic justice, needs perceptive and skeptical minds like yours. So keep your heads in the game.