Bill writes:
> It seems rather perverse to put the onus on those who are disenfranchised
by the electoral system to justify their decision to vote according to their
wishes.
Why is it perverse to ask a human being to accept responsibility for her/his actions?
> That the electoral system doesn't count their votes is something that you
should ask those who designed the electoral system to justify.
I do ask that. But I also believe that every person should acknowledge their own measure of responsibility. That to me is the first step toward being capable of producing change.
> Pragmatically, I have already explained that the strategy must be to force
those people who can change the electoral system to back down and agree to
count everyone's vote, even those who vote against them. Make them bleed
votes until they surrender.
But what about the bleeding in the black and queer communities as a result of Bush's re-election? Is that just part of the acceptable losses? To whom do blacks and queers surrender?
> The Democrats and republicans are intent on blackmail and extortion to
force people to
vote for them, blaming those who refuse to bow to the pressure is pathetic.
Not pathetic. Just asking people to be human and accept responsibility. If someone helps to elect Bush by voting for Nader and/or the Green candidate and, therefore, helps to perpetuate Bush's racist and homophobic policies, I believe that person needs to be called to account.
Yoshie asks:
> Which is more important to the power elite of the Democratic Party --
keeping out Green Party candidates by maintaining the electoral system that
may make minor parties potential "spoilers," i.e. at the cost of potentially
losing to Republican candidates, or defeating Republican candidates by
reforming the electoral system to provide full representation so no minor
party will be a potential "spoiler"?
I think both are important. At the moment there are 7 months to the election. In that time can electoral reform be accomplished? I think not. So Ralph Nader and the Green Party candidate will serve as spoilers who may help Bush to victory.
Will voting for Nader or the Green Party candidate effect electoral reform? I do not think so. I believe reform will occur from the bottom up, not the top down. Trickle down reform, like trickle down economics, is wishful thinking not effective strategy.
Carrol Cox writes:
> The election of Bush is not terrifying. The continued absence of a strong
left movement independently of the electoral process _is_terrifying.
That too. But if one considers what Bush's re-election will mean for blacks and queers, I do not see how how his continued success can be considered less than terrifying.
Brian Dauth Queer Buddhist Resister