Non-voting is a strategy employed by various radical libertarians and anarchists who wish to promote a free society yet who view voting to be either unethical or impractical.
In support for this non-political strategy, some non-voters claim that voting does not make any positive difference. Anarcho-communist Emma Goldman, for example, allegedly observed that “If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.” [1] (Some also suggest that the mainstream media or plutocrats actually choose the candidates.) But non-voting ought not be confused with apathy. Those who advocate non-voting typically hope to see mass segments of the populace refusing to vote, on the grounds that such a mass movement will show clear discontent with the Establishment. Thus, for strategic non-voters, non-voting is more practical than voting.
In addition to strategic non-voters, there are also ethical non-voters, those who reject voting outright, not merely as an ineffective tactic for change, but moreover because they view the act as either (A) a grant of consent to be governed by the state, (B) a means of imposing illegitimate control over one's countrymen, or (C) both A and B. Thus, this view holds that through voting, one necessarily finds her- or himself violating the non-aggression axiom.
Strategic and ethical non-voting are not mutually exclusive, and for many non-voters, these two rationales overlap.
Anarcho-libertarian ideologies that generally advocate non-voting as a key strategy for social or politocal change include voluntaryism and agorism.
[edit] See also
[edit] External links
