The religious ritual of v*ting

The only reason I can see for a liberty-leaning statist to v*te for Gary Johnson is as an attempt to break the hold of the DemoCRAPublicans. He’s no libertarian and his running mate William Weld is an authoritarian monster and anti-liberty bigot right up there with Donallary Clump (and actually much worse than one half of that twisted statist chimera).

But since it’s all a superstitious ritual anyway, even that’s a weak justification. Politics matters only to the extent you let it matter.

I will admit this, though- the v*ters are right about one thing. V*ting in and of itself is not an act of aggression.

Demanding that I go along with the results of your v*te, however, IS an act of aggression. If you would impose the results of your election on me by force, you are an aggressor. A thug. A bully.

You wouldn’t want to be a thug, would you? Then have your election and leave me alone. I do not consent.

So, v*te, but keep it classy and non-aggressive. Remember that it’s nothing but a religious ritual, and the results don’t apply to those who aren’t believers in your religion of Statism. You can’t demand that atheists tithe or go to confession, and we laugh at your threats to excommunicate us. Nor do we fear your Anarchist Hell, knowing it is really much preferable to your Statist Paradise. Your religion doesn’t have any hold on us.

I will not abandon my home just because the mafia moved in. So keep your “If you don’t like it, move to Somalia” comments to yourself, or I’ll suggest that if you love authoritarian government so much, perhaps you’d be happier in North Korea or Venezuela.

V*te if it makes you feel as though you’ve accomplished something, but keep your filthy government off my life. Thanks.

This blog, like all of KentforLiberty.com, is reader supported. Thank you.


(Steemit link)

Advertisements

3 Responses to “The religious ritual of v*ting”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    “I will admit this, though- the v*ters are right about one thing. V*ting in and of itself is not an act of aggression.”

    Yes it is. It is conspiracy to commit murder and theft and a myriad of other crimes against humanity. It is a deliberate act with intent to violate.

    If Tom, Dick, Harry, Frank and George organize to rob a bank and split the loot, no matter which ones hold them at gunpoint or which drive the get-away car or who does the casing, they are all equally guilty of stealing from the bank.

    Statism is dependent upon constituency and force. Thus voters play a vital role in the organized systematic violation of billions. Voting is criminal.

    Go tell everyone, because it is reality, truth. They don't care and won't change.

    Do I have to say it?

  2. Kent McManigal Says:

    You can plot and plan a bank robbery all day every day, but until you put it into action, you haven't robbed a bank. It's not the v*ting (or the planning a bank robbery) that is the aggression- it is putting it into action. V*te all you want, just don't impose the results on me. Yes, I realize the whole point is imposing the results- but that's not an essential part of v*ting- it is a separate act.

    A friend and I used to elaborately plan the “elimination” of a problem person who kept making veiled threats toward me and my property (which he never acted on), but we never acted on it to actually harm him, so we didn't violate him.

    V*ting is a nothing act- it's what some do after that's the problem.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    V*ting is a criminal act, and one that fits even the government's definition of terrorism. It is nothing less than organized crime.

    Voting IS putting it into action. It is an expressed contract with government for consent and demand of whatever system of rules it has. It's rules claim ownership of you and your family as per jurisdiction. It is no different than a group of investors having a church ceremony, rules and voting, to hire thugs in superhero costumes to go around claiming they own everything. To absolve voters is suggesting hiring a hit-man or thugs to extort money is acceptable or ethical.

    There is also the argument of a standing army occupancy. By that I mean that government is a 24/7/365 thing, forced onto a given geographical boundary. In principle, it is no different than china taking over north america and making you worship the flying spaghetti monster. In such a case, nuking china would be acceptable.

    But it isn't china, but the usa that has taken over our homeland. Those united statians are responsible, all of them, …just a great big gang.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: