US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC :
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Elect Yourself!
21 Feb 2002
Modified: 22 Feb 2002
Folks who stay away from the polls "as a protest," or because "they're all crooked," ignore the fact that their "protest" is indistinguishable from apathy.
Does voting matter? Yes and no. Here's why:

First I learned from Noam Chomsky and other media analysts that voting has little significance because "our" elections are overwhelmingly influenced by the Republicrats' corporate media.

Digging deeper, I learned from the Council on Foreign Relations (my father is a member) that all "viable" candidates are pre-selected by the CFR and other so-called "non-profit think-tanks" such as the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group .

While educating myself about money and banking, I learned that all "viable" candidates are dependent on privately-issued money created out of nothing by the Federal Reserve Bank .

During Election Fraud 2000, there weren't even any real presidential debates! The "Big Boys" are testing us to see just how stupid we've become.

Most alarming of all, while investigating why Ralph Nader's support went from over 5% to a mere 2.5% overnight - despite the fact that an unusual number of citizens were registering to vote in a presidential election with the most unpopular selection of Republicrats of the century - I discovered that even if an "un-viable" candidate becomes popular, most U.S. vote-tabulation systems are ALSO controlled by private corporations:

So why bother voting? Well, at least it's free. Furthermore, we can write-in anyone we want. Even if your selections don't win, at least you're sending a signal to the "Big Boys" that you don't like THEIR selections.

In the 2001 "election", I voted for Buckminster Fuller for mayor of Boston and a bunch of other worthy non-candidates, including Che Guevara for city councillor. As is typical in Massachusetts "elections", we were given a choice of ONE candidate!

Although Bucky, Che and my other choices had passed away years ago, if they had miraculously won the elections, perhaps the present mafia monopoly would be removed from office.

Writing in a candidate is like voting for "none of the above", but with some suggestions of the type of government (or absence thereof) you'd like.

Furthermore, write-ins indicate that you're not being fooled by Big Brother's electronic voting machinery.

I've never voted for myself. But this year I shall. Why don't you? It's FREE!

Meanwhile, a serious approach to solving all these problems is TEA:

Vote for Yourself
A Random Opinion™ by Skip Mendler

The morning that I sat down to begin this essay, the radio had a story about the legal troubles of Louisiana's former Governor Edwards, who'd been accused of taking bribes. You might remember that the last time Edwards ran for governor, his opponent was the notorious David Duke -- which gave voters there a clear choice between a known crook and a known racist. Many people held their noses and voted for Edwards in that election -- but certainly many others just turned away instead.

Today's voters may be forgiven for having similar disillusionment with the political process -- but noninvolvement, I must insist, is not an option.

Folks who stay away from the polls "as a protest," or because "they're all crooked," ignore the fact that their "protest" is indistinguishable from apathy. Rather than saying, as some do, "Don't vote -- it only encourages them," I would say that it is not voting that encourages irresponsibility and unresponsiveness on the part of elected officials, and that leaves our government as easy pickings for special interests.

But, some will say, what should we do when there's no one worth voting for? When neither of the major parties offer someone whom we can support, or when the similarities between candidates overwhelm the differences? If you don't have the option of voting for a third-party candidate (and the system is set up in such a way that this is a rare option indeed), there is still a way for you to let your political opinion be known at the polls.

I call this method "Vote for Yourself" (VFY).

If you have no other option, no one else that you deem worthy of your vote, don't stay away -- rather, just write in your own name. (After all, who else shares more of your values? Who else can you count on to look after your own interests?) Imagine the impact that a widespread VFY campaign could have -- "The Republican got 17% of the vote, the Democrat got 15%, and Other got 68%..." This, more than almost anything else I can think of, would get the attention of the established politicians, remove any illusion of "mandates," and give clear evidence of the level of disaffection among the American electorate for "politics as usual." Remember, the only "wasted vote" is the one that you don't cast -- or that you vote in a way contrary to your conscience. Go to the polls this November, and, if you have to, Vote for Yourself.

See also:
Add a quick comment
Your name Your email


Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.


Axl Rose in 2004!
21 Feb 2002
john chance, what is up with this TEA stuff, you are really pushing this one. I think it sounds pretty right on except that you are so super forceful with it. Hey, have you ever read "The Creature From Jekyll Island? Thats a gr8 book about the creepy Federal Reserve and even worse is how it relates so perfectly with the New WARrld Order. Anyway Since I turned 18, about 8 years ago, I always vote for someone stupid like Mickey Mouse (although I do regeret that one) and Jello Biafra because I couldn't handle the guilt of knowing I put one of those republicrat shmucks in office. I did vote for Nader in the last election. I think creative voting makes voting more fun however if the green party has another good candidate its definately worth supporting that party. ciao! nik
Everyone in 2012!
22 Feb 2002
Voting Green is fine. So is voting Libertarian, Natural Law, Socialist, Constitutionalist, Radical, Conservative, Democrat, Republican or Donald Duck.

What matters most is the qualities of the individuals you're voting for, not the party line.

All parties are covertly influenced by the very forces they claim to be against, especially those that are perceived as a significant threat to the status quo, such as the Greens.

I've read lots of stuff by and about the Federal Reserve Bank (and other covert psyop programs). There's a diversity of new (and old) money systems emerging to replace the failing system.

Real Greens have understood and endorsed non-fraudulant money for decades.

Among all the systems I know of, TEA (Time-Energy Accounting) is the most comprehensive, simple, democratic, decentralized, ecological, robust and unchallenged by any objective observers.

Everyone can judge for themselves the validity and viability of TEA since it's so simple and transparent.

So why don't you?
See also: