David McElroy

making sense of a dysfunctional culture

libertarian

I have no ‘duty’ to vote, even if I agree with you about freedom

By ·

As most Americans gear up to pay attention to another presidential campaign season, I’m once again hearing an argument that’s been around for a long time. Does every U.S. citizen have a duty to vote?

It’s long been a staple of “good government types” that everyone has a responsibility to be an informed citizen and then to vote on election day. Newspaper editorialists who’ve run out of actual things to editorialize about are fond of writing a piece (right before election day) about the duty to vote. I seem to recall that I’ve written such editorials a time or two in the distant past when I was an editor, although I did once write a controversial column asking ignorant people not to vote. But that’s another story entirely.

The argument I’m hearing right now, though, is from freedom-loving people who argue that libertarians and others who desire freedom have a duty to go to the polls and vote for the candidate who they think is most likely to bring about liberty. Well-meaning liberty-lovers frequently insist that the rest of us have such a duty.

Keep Reading

Related Posts

Do you obey petty rules? Or do you fight The Man in hopes of change?

By ·

It’s an age-old question for people who face authority they don’t want to obey: Is it better to quietly follow orders to avoid punishment or is it better to defy authority and fight for change?

The answer isn’t as clear-cut as it might first appear. What’s more, there’s no one correct answer. But I want to tell you the conclusion I’ve come to for myself.

Many of my friends are committed activists for freedom. Because of that, some of them attend various protests and engage in provocative acts of civil disobedience. I have a lot of respect for people who take this route, and I understand why the make the choice they do. There have been times in history when such attempts have brought about change, such as during the U.S. civil rights movement of the ’50s and ’60s. I don’t happen to believe it’s the right approach today, though, so it’s not my way. However, I’m not going to tell other people what’s right for them, because a) it’s their choice and b) I might be wrong.

If the only way — or even the best way — of achieving a more free society was to get the state’s co-operation in modifying its rules, I might possibly choose their way. But I think it’s ultimately smarter and more useful to find solutions outside the state entirely.

Keep Reading

Related Posts

Correcting an old error: there’s no such thing as ‘We the People’

By ·

With apologies to the men who drafted and adopted the U.S. Constitution, I have to point out something that’s not especially popular: There’s no such person or entity as “We the People.”

I frequently see political groups — from every orientation — claim to be “We the People.” Democrats used it to attack the Bush administration. Republicans do it now to attack the Obama administration. (The “tea party” groups seem to especially love the phrase.) Libertarians and various fringe groups do it at times, too.

In all cases, these groups are trying to claim that their views are the legitimate will of “the people.” The problem is that “the people” don’t speak with one voice. For instance, activists demanding gay marriage in the name of “We the People” have a very different thing to say than a religious group demanding recognition of the traditional definition of marriage, even though they also claim to speak for “We the People.”

There isn’t one big unanimous voice. There wasn’t one when the Constitution was adopted. There’s no such thing as a collective will — and there’s no moral way to impose One True Way on everybody in the name of “We the People.”

The truth is that “We the People” is an emotional phrase that’s been used to mean many different things to many different people, frequently by demagogues preying on people’s ingrained prejudices. But we need to quit looking to vague and misleading collective phrases such as this. We need to realize that we’re all individuals, with the right to go our own different ways. If we’re going to get to work on the serious business of finding peaceful ways to accomplish that, we have to give up on the emotional fiction that any of us — or any group of us — speak for “We the People.”

Related Posts