Hi, I helped campaign against the Treaty of Lisbon here in Ireland but didn't vote. The Treaty was defeated and the growth of the EU has experienced a hiccup. They are planning on re-running the referendum soon but the economy has fallen apart in the meantime and it is believed there will be a massive no vote in protest against anything the government proposes.
Arguing somewhat within the Statist paradigm, as referendums have the possibility of making government even more distant and unaccountable, would any of the anarchists here make exception to voting and campaigning in referendums?
In other words, the Irish Government are criminals but the MEPs are savages. I realise in a sense I would be voting for the lesser of two evils and legitimising voting.
For me, of course I am opposed to the concept of political integration and government itself, but it strikes me that it is desperately important that everything be done to stop further integration in Europe in any way possible. Trying to enlighten the masses to An-Cap is a difficult task, but at least they can easily understand that the EU is bad.
How should I proceed when the next referendum comes to pass? Will I bother campaigning?
Thanks
http://irishliberty.wordpress.com/
Retrolives:In other words, the Irish Government are criminals but the MEPs are savages. I realise in a sense I would be voting for the lesser of two evils and legitimising voting.
Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito.
Haha, point taken!
There's nothing wrong with defensive voting, so I think voting against the EU is fine. A vote against the EU referendum is not a vote for your national government.
This is a hard one, voting passively affirms the false dichotomy of the system but at the same time as a politics rejecting anarchist, it is difficult to deny that Ron Paul has done wonders for the movement and the spread of libertarian ideas...
If you are expecting a resounding no vote by the Irish people then maybe this at least relieves some of your perceived burden...? Not by any means definitive but something nevertheless. This is kind of on my mind also...(in my opinion it is kind of apathetic to vote, rather than the usual yarn that is spun so its especially hard for me to answer).
Hope this wasnt useless.
Make 'em watch Braveheart. Was Braveheart popular in Ireland?
~jaq
Yeah, Braveheart is great.
That's it exactly alansmithee. Ron Paul was brilliant. He set me down the road to the Mises Institute and thus like many anarchists I find it very difficult to abandon political action in its entirety.
I just have a feeling that Referendums are special and the usual anarchist theory that voting changes nothing don't apply.
I don't want to seem like a tool if I go around telling people not to vote for a corrupt system but also that I don't believe in the EU so if you are going to vote, vote no. It seems inconsistent.
I don't think that a vote which drastically and emphatically reduces the power of the state is necessarily immoral (though such an opportunity is rare indeed). However, I think that it may yet be unwise to make use of the system to which one is morally opposed in any case. The political system rests almost entirely on an appearance of legitimacy, and it seems to me that voting, no matter what for, feeds into that appearance.
Pro Christo et Libertate integre!
MacFall: I don't think that a vote which drastically and emphatically reduces the power of the state is not(?) necessarily immoral (though such an opportunity is rare indeed). However, I think that it may yet be unwise to make use of the system to which one is morally opposed in any case. The political system rests almost entirely on an appearance of legitimacy, and it seems to me that voting, no matter what for, feeds into that appearance.
I don't think that a vote which drastically and emphatically reduces the power of the state is not(?) necessarily immoral (though such an opportunity is rare indeed). However, I think that it may yet be unwise to make use of the system to which one is morally opposed in any case. The political system rests almost entirely on an appearance of legitimacy, and it seems to me that voting, no matter what for, feeds into that appearance.
This is true, but then again you could use the pragmatic ('your single vote changes nothing') argument against that position too. e.g. Your vote doesnt change anything so dont vote vs. your abstaining from voting wont bring about a libertarian utopia so vote, lol.
I think as an argument it can be used equally effectively against either party and as an argument its pretty vacuous, just a case of, whomever uses it first looks practical, whoever uses it second looks childish, lol.
In a practical sense (theory aside) it think it comes down to, if you can stall the state's growth, should you do it? (and the 'obvious' answer is one I personnally find counter intuitive, namely probably yes - baring in mind that I dont vote and cuss everyone I know who does )
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap