[Peace-discuss] Not voting

[C. G. Estabrook]

Actually, the opposite is probably the case.  By getting you to 
participate in the highly conditioned system that produces a president, 
the USG claims that you've ratified it.

Example: everyone within the limits of allowable debate discusses the 
"Reagan landslide" produced by the "great communicator." In fact, three 
out of four eligible voters did *not* vote for Reagan in 1980 and 1984 
(Half didn't vote, and he took half of the votes of those who did.)  But 
he was said to have a mandate.

In fact, outside to the "tertiary bourgeoisie" (roughly the 
college-educated third of the population), Americans know that the 
presidential election is a matter for the advertising industry (hence 
its expense), the media, and a peculiar group of celebrities -- "show 
business for ugly people."

As Chomsky says, you have to be highly educated to believe nonsense like 
this, and most Americans don't.  They don't vote, not because they're 
content (they're not), but because they know that it won't make much 
difference.

Think of the presidential elections in your lifetime: can you say that 
things would have been substantially different if the principal opponent 
had won? (Kerry? Gore? Dole? Bush Sr.? Carter? etc.) The system has been 
designed by means of the greatest American invention -- the PR industry 
-- so that it's largely a matter of indifference to those who hold 
wealth and power in this country, who actually is elected.

But they do want you to ratify it. --CGE


Karen Medina wrote:
> Silence means consent.
> 
> If you are happy and content, then stay home.