A Dangerous Proposal and Accountability In Action

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Let me begin with an untenable and outrageous proposition: put hungry babies at voting booths and see how people vote. This of course wouldn't be allowed, since we're not allowed to influence people's vote... ok we are allowed to influence people's votes, just not for the few hours they are voting.

This unconscionable proposal is meant to introduce a concept. This concept is one of responsibility. Accountability, if you will. Much of political thought revolves around theories concerning "what is my problem" and "what is your problem". More than this, what does the act of voting entail?

I believe that the act of voting entails the assumption of everyone else's problems. That is, by choosing to actively engage in democracy, all those things that aren't "your problem", magically become "your problem". Why? Because you are, in fact and in deed, acting and deciding on those problems.

So are you truly responsible for hungry babies that you don't know or care about? I would say so, at least as much as you engage in democracy. For whatever else moral reasoning we might leverage, choosing of your own free will to make decisions about hungry babies makes you responsible for hungry babies. This is the fundamental ramification of democracy. In it you gain representation. For it, you become responsible for things that are not otherwise your problem.

So I propose the following to conservatives: stop voting, and make your words true. It isn't your problem, after all.

Comments

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

So what, you're putting them there as snacks in case people get peckish while voting or something?





....and I had a srs face reply all written out and decided it didn't contribute enough new opinion.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

You have reminded me of the academic denial of cannibalism.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

At first glance, yes, I think abstaining from voting makes you less, or not at all, responsible, for the process of governance which makes decisions on things.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

You really expect Americans would actually work and be involved enough to put policies in effect instead of relying on the latest conspiracy theory about a hostile force soon to cause the imminent collapse of the invincible juggernaut of civilizations?

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

It would appear that hundreds and thousands of policies are in effect, so I would certainly expect, inductively speaking, for policies to be put in effect.

[pastorlenny.livejournal.com]

The issue is really babies taking more responsbility for the parents to whom they are born.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Spoken like a man who wants to be pushed around in a wheelchair during his sunset years.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Well that's on the parents aint it?

[policraticus.livejournal.com]

Are there no prisons? Are there no workhouses?

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

I don't think you quite understand us, sir.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Yes there are prisons. The workhouses are all overseas.

[sealwhiskers.livejournal.com]

I can see Libertarianism must be an attractive political market for you to sink your teeth into.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

In my opinion I think it's a good thing that people vote for their own problems, I think at the very least people are voting for honest reasons.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Agreed.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I simply wish they kept their problems out of Washington. They then become problems for people in other states and for people overseas.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

I have never understood the sentiment that if you are a terrible person but dont try to.hide it, it is somehow excused.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

Agreed on the condition that the laws that you vote for do not apply to me.

In a similar spirit to your OP I would propose a 3 tiered society.

upon reaching legal age a person would be required to choose which tier in which to live.

The first tier would be "the Protected" they would recieve full benifits for life from the government. In exchange for this bounty they would be protected from things like smoking, drinking, fatty food, fast cars, and anything else think should be banned.

The second tier would be "the Saved" these people would function in much the same manner as the protected but with a religious base rather than social democrat one.

the fina tier would be "the Free" the free recieve no benifits from the government that they do not pay for them selves (call 911? better have a credit card handy) in exchange the various banns that effect the protected and the saved would not apply to the free. They'd be allowed to drive as fast as they want, marry who they want, and in general tell the other two tiers to take thier rules and shove em up thier collective asses.

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

Your age of consent might be a bit low for this scheme. The age of majority is a poor point in life to make long term decisions.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

This is an absolutely terrible system that would REQUIRE segregation.

Cause if I can drive as fast as I like, I'm risking YOUR life, if we share roads.
Doubly so if I am drunk and driving on your roads.

[enders-shadow.livejournal.com]

im sorry, i just realized that the free CANNOT drive on the roads paid for and maintained by the first and second tier.

have fun with your filthy water, disgusting air, lack of roads, zero hospitals, and the perpetual threat of someone with a gun coming and taking your shit.


that sounds like a great lifestyle.


your thoughts leave me so amazingly baffled

[sophia-sadek.livejournal.com]

I am reminded of a line I overheard as I approached an entertainment venue. An unkempt panhandler was soliciting donations. A woman, who was also heading into the venue, leaned toward her teen aged son and said, "This is why we go to college."

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

I'll stop voting when I'm no longer subject to other people's rules.

[rimpala.livejournal.com]

Concerning the OP

Who are these hungry babies and why aren't they getting fed?

I don't know about anyone else, but my reaction to seeing a hungry baby in a voting booth is to ask who's child that is, because it's obvious that someone has left the child there be it a mother or other guardian. If I found the parent or caretaker I would give them some money to go buy some formula or baby food because god save the fucking christ that child needs to be fed immediately.

If I found out someone was intentionally starving children to make a political statement I think I would charge them with child abuse.

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

Who are these hungry babies and why aren't they getting fed?
Someone cut their benefits.

. If I found the parent or caretaker I would give them some money to go buy some formula or baby food because god save the fucking christ that child needs to be fed immediately.
Ok.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

I propose an addendum that next to the voting options it's scribbled in the baby dies if you vote here and for the other ones the baby doesn't die if you vote here and they must see the results of this immediately after they leaving the voting booth. Personally I would vote for the former because of overpopulation.

[sandwichwarrior.livejournal.com]

And you've accused me of being a monster?