NEWS
No morality in voting, author says
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Ken Harris:
- No morality in voting, author says (February 26, 2008)
- ASM still pursuing new grocery store (February 26, 2008)
- Scientist to lead new Institute department (February 26, 2008)
- UW brings new lawyer onto administrative team (February 25, 2008)
- Badger ticket prices will not increase, board decides (February 25, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Assembly passes contentious bills (November 2, 2005)
- Primary apathy (February 21, 2002)
- ASM elections see low voter turnout (April 14, 2006)
- Hitchens rails on religion Saturday (October 15, 2007)
- City Hall accepts ballots cast early (October 19, 2004)
by Ken Harris
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Individualist feminist author Wendy McElroy told a large group of University of Wisconsin students Monday night they should not vote because it is immoral.
“I am extreme left. I am extreme right. I am crazy,” McElroy said to start her speech.
She added political consent is the most important thing a person has. Voting is an act of participation in the government system, said McElroy, and this gives the government permission to infringe on individual freedom.
“Whether or not you say ‘yes’ is the difference between rape and an act of sex,” McElroy said. “The act of saying ‘yes’ to a political candidate is so important that it’s essential that you don’t do it.”
McElroy organized her presentation in three parts, saying voting is wrong politically, practically and morally.
The most important argument surrounding voting is the morality of it, McElroy said. She said voting is the same as giving up your rights to make your own decisions. She added this is wrong because not everyone has consented to give up their rights.
“You can sign over your rights, but you have no right to sign over anyone else’s rights,” McElroy said.
According to McElroy, voting is also impractical because an individual vote matters very little.
“You’re as likely to win the lottery as you are of deciding the winning vote,” McElroy said.
McElroy added the time someone spends following an election and voting will result in little change, compared to the change one can affect spending that time volunteering for a good cause.
She said the time spent participating in the voting process is also wasted because votes are counted inaccurately or tampered with. In addition, people can be “defrauded” by unfulfilled campaign promises.
McElroy said politicians need people to vote, no matter who they vote for, because they need to be legitimized. She said voting is supporting the rules of the political process and giving it validation.
“An old joke says, ‘Don’t vote, it only encourages them,’” McElroy said. “Governments don’t like to use force. They need your consent. They need legitimacy.”
McElroy also said she does not agree with the argument that people should vote for the lesser of two evils.
She turned the phrase and called this argument “the greater of two evils.” According to McElroy, people who say it is everyone’s duty to vote would rather have someone vote for a terrible person like Hitler than to not vote at all.
“Choosing between two evils becomes a habit,” McElroy said. “When do you get to choose the good?”
She said she did not believe the Bible said to “go forth and do less evil.”
UW political science professor Donald Downs, who is a co-director of the Center for the Study of Liberal Democracy — the group that sponsored the event — said the purpose of having McElroy speak on campus was “to contribute to the intellectual diversity of the campus.”
“The campus tends to be a little monolithic and we like to present views that are outside the mainstream,” Downs said. “You can’t know something unless you know the counterarguments as well.”
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 6:27am):
You've got to be kidding me. It seems that this woman is suggesting government shouldn't exist because that would infringe on our 'individual freedom'. I like to believe in the good of people, but I'm not so naive as to say we can function as a society with a little law and order. We need some structure, and we have it in our government. Of course our government isn't perfect, because people aren't perfect. By not voting youre doing the exact opposite of what she seems to want, a say in our own lives. If you dont vote you have no right to complain about the way our country is run because you didnt at least try to make a difference. One person's vote may not tip the scale, but one person's attitude can inspire millions. Vote.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 9:55am):
I agree that idiots like her should definitely not vote.
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.
-- Plato
I'm sure she worries about this a lot - LOL.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 10:24am):
I think you're missing her point entirely, 6:27am.
Voting is essentially acquiescing to the status quo. That's why I won't do it. We currently have a system of government that allows for legal bribery in the form of lobbying and campaign contributions. It's quid pro quo legislation; pay to play.
There is no real question about that, it's obvious when comparing campaign donations and lobbying to later individual government contracts awarded to contributors or looking at laws, subsidies and tax breaks tailored to benefit a very small number of people and institutions who give a very large amount of money to polticians. It's a joke. A sham. And I'm not playing.
But then you've got these voting fanboys who are obsessed with the gamesmanship and salaciousness of present day American politics and accuse anybody who won't play along of being apathetic, or lazy, or anarchistic. That's absurd. Just because they drink the kool-aid, doesn't mean everybody has to. And just because they are in the majority doesn't mean that they are correct. There is a hell of a lot of money spent on the year long dog and pony show that we're living right now, and it's all designed to bowl people over with sound and fury so they ignore how little politicians actually do for those of us who are not monied special interests.
I don't know if I'd use the word "immoral", but I certainly don't think there's anything inherently good about voting in a corrupt system. In fact, I think it's irresponsible and unethical to get so caught up in the circus and the rhetoric that you don't sit back and think about what's really going on here.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 11:17am):
You're right. This woman seems to be a little off. Whats more upsetting is that this college is allowing such talk. Last i checked this is still america. Last i checked we still have thousands of american soldiers dying every year to protect rights, like the right to vote. I've always been amazed by "feminists" that say not to vote. Yet these same women are screaming about women's rights. Was women winning the right to vote NOT one of the biggest steps forward for women? It breaks my heart to live in SUCH a great state, and fund such GREAT schools, and then see that one of our schools is this sickly liberal and mis-guided. Im sure this woman talked for hours. I will now debunk her in 3 words. VOTE AND VOLUNTEER.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 11:29am):
Hilarious!
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 11:39am):
I liken it to Sophie's Choice.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 1:04pm):
Funny she should come to a campus that voted 4-1 in favor of Barack. She must be a Clinton supporter.
SERIOUSLY GUYS DON'T VOTE!
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 1:12pm):
I'm pro this. Good job, Downs.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 2:57pm):
Monolithic, huh Downs? I'm not quite sure that having a well educated and politically knowledgeable student body, capable of making decisions for themselves rather than going off what they see on CNN, makes the campus monolithic. Yes we live in Madison, a mid-western liberal bubble, but that is by no means grounds for being labeled as uniform. I mean, where else do you have the epicenter of the largest pro-First Amendment group in the United States, FFRF, and also have polling places and election centers located in churches?
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 6:12pm):
That's got to be the stupidest argument I've ever heard, and I've worked with people who think George Bush is actually a good president!
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 6:29pm):
i think that this view is ludacris. that woman is not an AMERICAN. Voting is the premise upon which our country was built. If she does not like that then she can kindly leave free America and stop enjoying the rights of freedom, Cuba is waiting.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 6:36pm):
"Last i checked we still have thousands of american soldiers dying every year to protect rights"
I realize this article isn't about this at all, but seriously, this phrase is overused. Where are they fighting for our rights? Where have they ever fought for our rights? The Revolutionary War was about gaining rights, but aside from British incursions and a couple fires at the White House, we've never been at risk of losing our rights. Al-Sadr may hate us, but he doesn't have any means of airlifting armed men into America, and no matter what Osama pulls off, he can't enslave our country.
You, Sir, missed the point of the speech.
Anonymous (February 26, 2008 @ 11:36pm):
it's good to hear people with different opinions.....but voting is immoral?? really?????
Anonymous (February 27, 2008 @ 12:05am):
it's good to hear people with different opinions.....but voting is immoral?? really?????
Anonymous (May 2, 2008 @ 2:45am):
"You're right. This woman seems to be a little off. Whats more upsetting is that this college is allowing such talk."
Irony at it's finest.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
