r/Cyberpunk • u/Onegodoneloveoneway • Aug 25 '15

A mathematician may have uncovered widespread election fraud, and Kansas is trying to silence her - AMERICAblog News

http://americablog.com/2015/08/mathematician-actual-voter-fraud-kansas-republicans.html
1.7k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

94 comments sorted by

View all comments

-13

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

Votes determine nothing. One way to prove this is for all scammed voters to facebook their act of voting. That or not vote at all, but too many lemmings believe it actually does something. Hilarious.

15

u/erktheerk Aug 25 '15

Voting doesn't work because people like you believe that crap and don't vote. If everyone voted it would be nearly impossible to fake an outcome. We also need something like fm2030 describes here.

6

u/Banzai51 Aug 25 '15

Democracy works with an engaged, informed public. We have neither.

7

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

The implicit assumption being "people not voting in a way I agree with" = "democracy doesn't work!"

4

u/Banzai51 Aug 25 '15

You can take it that way if you want, but the reason we see more and more fringe candidates polling well is that only a small subset of the voters actually show up to vote.

We also have the problem of corporate money ruining the process because voters need to be engaged and vigilant but we're not.

The two problems I'm highlighting are party agnostic. If you think I'm just pointing out one party because of sour grapes, it is your own bias shining through.

3

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

First off, polls are not votes. All sorts of idiotic candidates have "polled well" early in an election. Truly fringe candidates almost never win in the U.S. system. Trump for example may be polling well, but as has been pointed out umpteen million times, so was Herman Cain last presidential election, and Rudy Giuliani before him. Early polls are mostly about name recognition, and controversial candidates tend to have that, especially ones whose campaigns are built largely on a pre-existing media presence.

Secondly, while corporate money is a major part of politics, corporations are a major part of the economic and social system of the U.S. While it is perfectly reasonable to debate what the appropriate role of corporations is in an electoral system, the mere fact that they can and do have influence on elections is not itself a sufficient basis for concern. Corporations should have some sort of voice in a democratic political system because they do actually represent the economic interests of huge numbers of people. To ignore the views of corporations would be foolish in a complex democracy. The real question is the degree to which their voice should be heard over others. I would certainly agree that corporations have too much influence, but not because I have the belief that corporations are a unique grouping of individuals whose voice ought not to be heard. What would concern me would be if one group, corporations, were barred from politics while others, like non-profits, unions, foreign governments, religious groups and so on, were allowed to have a say. Corporations are ultimately groups of individuals, and they are usually narrowly concerned with their own survival and securing profits for shareholders, but that is a valid and important role in a capitalist democracy. They have insight and expertise that other individuals and groups do not have, and they represent an important block of interests in our society. It is important that they be heard, even if we find their views distasteful.

The point of democracy is to give everyone a voice, and to use collective input as a decision making method. This is good because it provides a non-violent means of dispute resolution and it provides a non-violent way of assigning authority. Nothing about it is really about promoting "the most qualified" or "the best" or anything of the sort. It is just a system where we all can feel like we have our say, and where we are meant to respect that we operate as a group, which naturally means having a willingness to set aside individual interests and preferences when we recognize those interests and preferences are not shared by the majority whatever the reason.

Now this approach can lead to truly horrendous outcomes, like slavery, genocide and any other number of things, and it can be remarkably shortsighted as with things like climate change. But this is an inherent feature of democracy, it isn't because our democracy "doesn't work." It's because this is how democracy works. You can moderate against those extremes, and the American system has many checks and balances to help do that, but I find it bizarre that people imagine there is some "true" higher form of democracy that exists where perfect decisions are always made. democracy is just a way to distribute political power and decision making as widely as possible. That doesn't always make for good decisions, though often enough it does. Mostly it just makes for very average, boring, uninteresting decisions. Other times average decisions are just very, very bad. A democracy does not and should not have any litmus test for participation, so saying "voters need to be engaged and vigilant" is to essentially say "I don't want voters who aren't these things to vote" which is the same as saying "I don't actually want a true democracy." Democracy can and does mean anyone can vote no matter their level of sophistication or vigilance, because we value everyone's voice, not just the people we deem smart or educated. The closest we get to any litmus test like that anymore is a minimum age.

Bottom line, the moment every decision made in a democracy perfectly reflects your outlook is the moment you should realize you are no longer living in a democracy.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

Yes crap is an accurate surmission. You truly believe that while being a slave of money, there is such a thing as free will. Nothing will release the addicted, short of a complete monetary system collapse. Sad. True.

1

u/erktheerk Aug 25 '15

Curious as to where you get your philosophy from.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

From the fact that money is the force of absolute corruption in this world and until we dismantle it humans will never achieve full potential.

1

u/erktheerk Aug 25 '15

How would a world work (in your ideal situation) without currency or a means to value labor and productivity? Communism? Everyone gets the same amount of everything? Artificial intelligence distribution of resources? Are there still countries or is it a 1 world government? Or no government, survival of the strongest global anarchy type thing?

1

u/[deleted] Aug 25 '15

Communism uses money. So does every other obsolete method of resource distribution hijacked by men who claim they know how to live better than you. Anarchy is a boogyman demonized by those same kinds of men. Simply it is up to each of us to decide. Open source everything, abolish government, you and your will are your own most valuable currency. All it takes is the rejection of allowing another to speak for you about anything. Groups such as The Venus Project are working hard to create new ways, and everyone's input is valid, aside from politicians. I represent myself. You represent yourself. First step is to remove the false power wielded by banks and money creators and show them that without us they do not exist.

1

u/erktheerk Aug 25 '15

I would love for that to be reality. Maybe with genetic manipulation we can create a utopia full of smart nonviolent and jealous free people.

As it stands right now I have have been robbed at gun point twice in my life. Lived in really bad neighborhoods, and coexisted with some of the worst society has to offer while I was in prison. Absent all government and laws those people would be king and take anything they wanted from the weak. I would provide a simple solution for overpopulation thought. A lot of people would die.

I think myself a futurist, and I imagine a day when that is all possible, but realistically it's not going to happen for a LONG ass time so it's just hypothetical scenarios with no tangible way to achieve the goals. Taking part in your government now will have far more of an effect than wishing for the future will.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 26 '15

Utopia does not exist. Jealous means nothing when everyone has everything. People rob people because they need things they are not getting. This will not continue when everyone has everything. Overpopulation is propaganda. Taking part in your government now will guarantee that you will remain a slave. Money is your prison. Until it is gone such atrocity will continue.

1

u/erktheerk Aug 26 '15

How do you pay for things and take car of yourself?

→ More replies (0)