About
Community
Bad Ideas
Drugs
Ego
Erotica
Fringe
Society
Politics
Anarchism
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Corporatarchy - Rule by the Corporations
Economic Documents
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Foreign Military & Intelligence Agencies
Green Planet
International Banking / Money Laundering
Libertarianism
National Security Agency (NSA)
Police State
Political Documents
Political Spew
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
Terrorists and Freedom Fighters
The Nixon Project
The World Beyond the U.S.A.
U.S. Military
Technology
register | bbs | search | rss | faq | about
meet up | add to del.icio.us | digg it

An Anarchists' Apololgia

by J. Neil Schulman

I have just registered to vote.

Those who have been following my libertarian writings for the last two decades may well wonder why I, one of the activists of the "Vote For Nobody!" campaign, and a proud antipolitical nonvoter for twenty years, have seemingly abandoned a principle of remaining aloof in all ways from the State, so as not to sanction it. They are quite right to ask, since in my own writings I have gone on record against voting, quoting Jack Parr that "It only encourages them."

Let me state for the record that in spite of this act, I still believe that voting, or registering to vote, is in no way a prerequisite to "good citizenship," or "social responsibility," and that those who refuse to sanction the State by registering with it for voting are taking a morally justifiable stance and a strategically valid one. "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain" goes the statist refrain around election time, yet the percentage of adults who choose not to register, and of registered voters who choose not to vote, gets higher every year. The establishment media call this apathy. Libertarians rightly call it resistance -- an unwillingness to play a rigged game.

Yet I have just registered to vote. Why?

I could quote Robert Heinlein's Lazarus Long and say, "Certainly the game is rigged. Don't let that stop you; if you don't bet you can't win." But that reasoning is specious: with a Congress that has gerrymandered districts to such an extent that there is a 98% reelection rate, the wheel isn't rigged -- it's \frozen\.

I could quote Lysander Spooner in \No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority\,

"In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, \even for the time being\. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he may become a master; if he does not use it, he must become a slave. And he has no other alternative than these two. In self- defence, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing."

This, however, strikes me as moral relativism at best, moral cowardice at worst. If one is voting to rule rather than be ruled, even in self defense, then one is abandoning the concept that freedom \works\, and that one never needs to choose between false dichotomies -- that the lesser of evils is still evil.

Nevertheless, Lysander Spooner's point is valid: one can not and should not take the act of registering to vote or voting as an implicit sanction of the State or of the political process. And let me state explicitly that for me it is not: I will vote, but I do \not\ promise to abide by the outcome of voting if that outcome maintains or increases the violation of individual rights.

Still, why should anyone believe me? Can one register to vote and still oppose the system in which one is voting? If one believes that the game is rigged and one stands no chance of winning, isn't one at best a sucker to put one's money on the table -- and at worst a shill, trying to con others into the game?

Until a few weeks ago I would have said yes. Obviously I have had a change of heart. Why?

I have been, for the last two decades, a committed libertarian revolutionary. I still am. I oppose "gradualism." I oppose the concept that one must work within the system to prevent anarchy: anarchy -- the absence of a centralized means of coercion -- is my goal. I oppose the "Fabian" approach to achieving social change -- the idea that one can vote in freedom "one step at a time."

I oppose trusting politicians with our rights. I oppose delegating one's rights to political institutions, or submitting them to the outcome of a vote. If a politician says, "A vote for me is a vote for freedom," he is a knave or a fool -- a knave if he knows that the method of politics is the aggrandizement of power for one's own ends, a fool if he doesn't realize that power once aggrandized must either be wielded or abandoned.

Yet I have registered to vote. Why?

Do I think that one can reform the existing major parties so that either of them can become a force for liberty? No. Do I think that the (or a) "Libertarian" party can gain political power and achieve liberty thereby? No, on two counts: (1) I doubt that any third party can overcome the obstacles the entrenched political parties have erected to protect their power; and (2) even if it succeeded, it would still be a political party and therefore subject to the same rules of power-politics that are antithetical to liberty.

Yet I have registered to vote. Why? What do I hope to accomplish by this act? What am I after? What's my pay-off?

CREATING A "NEGATIVE POWER BASE"

My answer is: I hope to use the political system to erect barriers to effective utilization of political power. I am going to try to obstruct the system from within. Throw sand into the gears. Slow it down.

My specific strategy is to use the Initiative system in California -- a method by which a popular vote can bypass both elected legislatures and the courts -- to coalesce a "negative power base."

What is a "negative power base"?

It is any single-issue coalition whose goal is to deny power to the State, or to return power to the individual. To be defined as a negative power base, the issue must be defined in such a way that no increase of power is granted to the State, and power currently wielded by the executive, legislative, or judicial branch is either stunted or dispersed.

I have assembled three propositions which I believe meet these criteria (I drafted the first and the third), which I call The California People's Initiative.

*** [SIDEBAR] ***

As can be seen by the propositions, none of them have the effect of sanctioning existing political power. Any one of them, if passed, increases the net power of individuals to control their own destinies. At worst the propositions can be stopped by political dirty tricks, or by being ignored by the courts, or interpreted out of existence -- yet, there is a high price for the statists to ignore the direct will of the people: it de-legitimizes the State for them to do so.

As we have seen recently in the Soviet Union, if the people are successful in using the system's own means for disempowering it, and the hard-liners attempt to maintain power in spite of the people's clear will, it creates a moment for revolutionary resistance.

If a popular will can be forged to restrict the State's power, the statists must either go peacefully, or attempt a coup.

You then either have peaceful revolution or violent revolution, and the outcome depends on who has the people with them.

I am not willing to put my trust in princes. But, as a revolutionary, I must admit that if I do not put my trust in the people, I have no where else to place it.

There is a personal cost to me for this decision. Some of my allies will now be suspicious of me and my motives. My address is now a matter of public record. I am now subject to being drafted by the State for jury duty.

This is a price I am willing to pay. I feel that by staying completely aloof from political action, I have in effect been marginalized.

I fully admit the possibility that this strategy may be flawed, and that it may backfire upon me. That is a risk I have chosen to take.

As to those who believe that the path I have taken is wrong, let me say: I do this alone. Let no one who is out of the system follow me in.

--J. Neil Schulman August 23, 1991 *** [SIDEBAR] ***

THE CALIFORNIA PEOPLE'S INITIATIVE PREAMBLE. PURPOSE OF ACTS The purpose of these Acts is to curtail the ever-increasing transfer of power away from the people and to political bodies controlled by narrow interests by (I.) Establishing a direct means by which the people can disapprove legislation it dislikes; (II.) Reaffirming the traditional right of juries to rule on the law as well as the facts in any trial where government is one of the parties; and (III.) Enabling those most victimized by crime to defend themselves rather than being forced to rely upon a government system of police and courts which does little to protect the public beforehand from crime and is otherwise ineffective at curtailing it. [It is my current understanding that each Article will have to be introduced as a separate proposition.]

ARTICLE I. CITIZEN'S LINE ITEM VETO.

SECTION I. PURPOSE OF ARTICLE: CONSTRUCTION

The State of California shall establish a statewide voicemail telephone system whereby voters may exercise a line- item veto over all legislation signed by the governor. A one- third vote in favor of vetoing a line item shall prevent it from becoming law, with no override available.

SECTION II. The Constitution of the State of California is hereby amended as follows:

Within one year from the passage of this Act:

A. 1. The State of California shall register any California voter who wishes to enroll for Citizen's Line Item Veto participation. Such enrollment shall identify these voters in a manner not invasive to their personal privacy, but with a level of security equivalent to that used by the commercial banking industry for telephone banking transactions.

2. The State of California shall establish a state-wide voice- mail telephone system, operated by touch-tone telephones using an (800) area code telephone number or other free-to-caller area code. All California voters enrolled for Citizen's Line Item Veto participation shall be entitled to vote on this system.

3. Each line item in all legislation signed by the governor the previous week shall be placed before the enrolled voters on this voice mail system. Each voter on the system shall be given one vote per line item of legislation signed by the governor, YES or NO.

4. A count shall be made each week of all votes on each line- item. If a line-item gains one-third or more NO votes, it shall fail to have been passed into law, and no appeal to any legislative, executive, or judicial authority may override this veto.

B. The State of California shall provide a weekly line-item summary of all legislation which has been signed into law by the governor the previous week. Such summary shall be in a form understandable to any resident of the State of California with a high school diploma issued by a California public school, and shall be made publicly available.

C. To compensate voters in the Line Item Veto for the time and effort of reading the legislation and registering their vote, all voters enrolled in the Line Item Veto who vote on the system at least eight times per year shall be exempt at point of sale on all purchases from the California Sales Tax for the next year.

D. No line-item vetoed by the voters of the Line Item Veto may be reintroduced into legislation for a period of three years.

E. No tax or other method of public funding, including all usage fees, shall pass into effect without being subject to the Citizen's Line Item Veto, nor shall any tax or other method of funding, including all usage fees, remain in effect two years from the passage of this proposition unless it is placed before the enrolled voters of the Citizen's Line Item Veto.

F. Any California legislator, judge, or elected or appointed public office-holder, state, country, municipal, or local, who attempts to obstruct the enactment of this Article or who otherwise fails to honor the intent of this Article, shall be immediately removed from office, and hereafter be forbidden to hold any office of honor or trust under the State of California, or any county or municipality. This disability may only be removed by a proposition enacted by the people.

ARTICLE II. JURIES.

SECTION I. PURPOSE OF ARTICLE: CONSTRUCTION

The purpose of this Act is to assure that jurors are made aware of:

(a) The jurors' inherent right to judge whether the law or laws applicable to the case being tried are unjust or misapplied.

(b) The jurors' traditional right to vote according to conscience.

To this end, juries affected by this Act shall be allowed to hear evidence concerning the defendant's motives. This Act shall be construed liberally to effect its purposes.

SECTION II. Article I of the Constitution of the State of California is amended by adding a Section 29 that reads:

"JURY RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES SECTION 29 Whenever state or local government is one of the parties in any trial by jury, the court must inform the jurors that in addition to their responsibility to judge the facts of the case, they have the inherent right to judge the law itself."

SECTION III. Any trial included under Section II. of this Article for which the jury has not been properly informed of its inherent right to judge the law itself shall be declared a mistrial.

SECTION IV. Any judge who exhibits a pattern of failing to inform juries of their inherent right to judge the law itself, or who otherwise fails to honor the intent of this Article, shall be immediately removed from office, and hereafter be forbidden to hold any office of honor or trust under the State of California, or any county or municipality. This disability may only be removed by a proposition enacted by the people.

ARTICLE III. EQUAL PROTECTION.

SECTION I. PURPOSE OF ARTICLE: CONSTRUCTION

The purpose of this article is to provide adequate means of protection against violent crime to those who are most victimized by it: women, the elderly, minorities, the physically handicapped, children, residents of neighborhoods where there is persistent gang presence or drug-related violence, or anyone who lives or works in a municipality where city, county, state, or federal police presence is inadequate to prevent or protect the citizenry beforehand from any of the following crimes: rape, child molestation, mugging, hate crimes, murder, attempted murder, assault, mayhem, armed or unarmed robbery, burglary (including automobile burglary), grand theft (including grand theft, auto), extortion, drive-by shootings, purse snatching, or any other attack or threat of attack against the persons or personal property of peaceful citizens.

SECTION II. The Constitution of the State of California is hereby amended as follows:

Anyone who satisfies the following criteria:

A. A citizen or legal resident of the United States and of the State of California; and who is

B. Eighteen years or older (unless a member of the armed forces, or a cadet training for the armed forces,in which case the age requirement is waived); and who has

C. Never been convicted of a violent crime or never pleaded not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity to a violent crime, or has never been involuntarily committed to a mental institution for having committed a violent crime;

D. And can satisfy being in one or more of the following categories:

1. A woman;

2. A member of any race, religious group, sect, nationality, or other minority for which there is a history of hate crimes;

3. Over 50 years of age (the minimum membership age for the American Association of Retired Persons);

4. Physically handicapped, or suffering from any physical condition which would tend to make one a target for criminal assault, attack, robbery, or violence;

5. The parent or legal guardian of a minor child, or a person \in loco parentis\ for a minor child;

6. A person who has ever been the victim of any of the following crimes: rape, child molestation, mugging, hate crimes, attempted murder, assault, mayhem, armed or unarmed robbery, burglary (including automobile burglary), grand theft (including grand theft, auto), extortion, drive-by shooting, purse snatching, or any other attack or threat of attack against one's person or personal property;

7. A person whose residency or work places them in a municipality where there is persistent gang presence or drug-related violence, or anyone who lives or works in a municipality where city, county, state, or federal police presence is inadequate to prevent or protect the citizenry beforehand from any of the following crimes: rape, child molestation, mugging, hate crimes, murder, attempted murder, assault, mayhem, armed or unarmed robbery, burglary (including automobile burglary), grand theft (including grand theft, auto), extortion, drive-by shootings, purse snatching,or any other attack or threat of attack against one's person or personal property;

8. Can demonstrate circumstances in which one is escorting or otherwise responsible for the safety of anyone in the previous categories;

will hereafter be granted an unlimited license to carry, concealed or unconcealed, loaded firearms, of any sort legally carried by any police officer, sheriff, judge or justice of the peace, elected or appointed public official, civil servant, government employee, or member of the organized or unorganized militia.

SECTION III.

A. Nothing in this article shall be construed to deny or limit the right of the people to keep and bear arms, as recognized by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and in other law.

B. In the event this article is held to infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms by unconstitutionally limiting the license to carry firearms to certain limited categories of the people, then Section II. D. is hereby omitted, and the remainder of this article shall continue in full force as if Section II. D. had never been a part of it.

SECTION IV.

The use of a firearm or other weapon in protection of one's own life, safety from bodily injury, or in defense of property, or in defense of the life, safety from bodily injury, or property of another, or in an attempt by a citizen to prevent or bring to an end the commission of a violent crime, unless such use is otherwise part of the commission of a felony or proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be negligent of the safety of others, shall be deemed a legal defense from all criminal charges and civil liability.

SECTION V.

Any California legislator, judge, or elected or appointed public office-holder, state, country, municipal, or local, who attempts to obstruct the enactment of this Article or who otherwise fails to honor the intent of this Article, shall be immediately removed from office, and hereafter be forbidden to hold any office of honor or trust under the State of California, or any county or municipality. This disability may only be removed by a proposition enacted by the people.

Copyright © 1991 by J. Neil Schulman

Logoright (L) 1991 by J. Neil Schulman

ABOUT J. NEIL SCHULMAN

J. NEIL SCHULMAN is the award-winning author of novels endorsed by Anthony Burgess and Nobel-economist Milton Friedman, and writer of the CBS' \Twilight Zone\ episode in which a time-travelling historian prevents the JFK assassination; he's also the founder and president of SoftServ Publishing, the first publishing company to distribute "paperless books" via personal computers and modems.

Most recently, Schulman has founded the Committee to Enforce the Second Amendment (CESA), through which he intends to see the individual's right to keep and bear arms recognized as a constitutional protection equal to those afforded in the first, fourth, fifth, and fourteenth amendments.

 
To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed.
If you have any questions about this, please check out our Copyright Policy.

 

totse.com certificate signatures
 
 
About | Advertise | Bad Ideas | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Drugs | Ego | Erotica
FAQ | Fringe | Link to totse.com | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
Hot Topics
Ed & Elaine Brown * Shots Fired *
george galloway what do you think of him?
Hinchey Amendment
why UK accepts US subjugation and infiltration?
George galloway suspended from HP
Why Marxism IS Economically Exploitive...
Situation in Turkey
Putin not playing nicely
 
Sponsored Links
 
Ads presented by the
AdBrite Ad Network

 

TSHIRT HELL T-SHIRTS