Quote from: Biomech on October 15, 2014, 07:02:27 PM

While I do not consider this a deliberate logical fallacy, I think you are conflating two different things. And that is apparent in your own words. As you noted, we have almost no choice in the use of the fiat currency. The overlords have decreed it legal currency, and for the most part you cannot legally refuse dollars. A lack of choice is not an endorsement. In truth, I'd rather not sleep, as it interrupts my busy life. But I must, or I will eventually die.

And as long as I am within the geographical confines of 'The United States' (or any other governmental construct for that matter), I am subject to their edicts. Again, no choice.

Quote

The franchise, by contrast, is directly participating in the system, not merely being subject to it. It is a claim on the right of accession, and by implication (and stated law) a promist to abide by the decision.

What 'franchise' are you talking about here? I am unaware of any stated law that states 'if one votes, one promises to abide by the decision', and if you don't vote, then you need not abide. Can you cite it for me? Indeed, the enforcers will enforce without even considering whether or not you voted - it matters not to them. I certainly deny that there is any such implication. You may believe that there is, which says something about what _you_ think it implies. You are not able to enforce your opinions upon me.

Quote

this would be true even if the money were gold or other things like blockchain based coins that they could not control. It is by the very act of voting an endorsement of the system if not the outcome.

Your statement that the very act of voting is an endorsement is an unsupported assertion. I disagree. Again - show me something authoritative that states such.

Quote

If the system could be reformed (I would argue that it works precisely as intended), then this might be valid. But in the actual facts that we must live with, you actually have NO say in the policy, NO say in the choices presented, nor in the most hyped election, NO say in the outcome.

Sorry. False. Don't misunderstand - I am directly aware of electoral fraud, and am convinced that it is way more extensive than reported. But there are elections, and to the greater extent, they do reflect the will of the voters. More germane, however, most elections have a choice which is less bad than the others. While some may say 'the lesser of two evils is still evil', not voting certainly does absolutely nothing to eliminate -- nor even reduce -- the evil. Further, the selection thereof can make a measurable difference in quality of life.

Quote

In the presidential election, you're vote literally and legally don't count.

By and large, the members of the electoral college respect the will of the voters whom they each represent. So as a practical matter, I would term your 'literally' assertion as false. Further, most states bind their delegates -- by law -- to vote according to the will as expressed by the general election. So your 'legally' assertion seems also on loose soil.

Quote

Participation in a rigged system will never lead to it's demise or it's reform. I completely disagree with this:

Quote

In the meantime, voting is the _only_ mechanism we have to exert any influence whatsoever over the system.

You are correct. It is not the only mechanism.

Quote

If you look to the history of the United States completely in a vacuum, without refernce to it's roots or any other nations, this still rings false. Those who have made the most impact and had the most influence never did so via the franchise, but via the pulpit.

So are you asserting that it need be either/or, and that the two are mutually exclusive? I think many would find Martin Luther King Jr as an example of someone who did much outside the system in order to reform it. Voter.

Quote

Education, Indoctrination, rallies, leaflets, pamphlets, Youtube videos, always taking a public stand against what you're opposed to ,and more importantly FOR what you believe in. These things wil gain far more traction on anything you have to say or want to change than changing the face of your kings.

This may be true. I must say however that the track record isn't very good. Either there has not been enough generations born and buried since the internet gave the power of the press to each of us, or we need to change tactics, or _something_. The US has been sliding ever-further into tyranny each passing year despite more people discussing more injustice. Yes, I realize this example could also be used to point to the failure of the idea of voting.

And I am involved with all of the above. As an additional increment, I vote.

Quote

This is a democracy. It was once a republic, but that was fatally shot with the 17th amendment. The loudest and most persuasive voices sway the mob, and that is where change occurs. Not the franchise itself, but CONTROL of those votes. This is the currency of the "elite" and why they truly don't care about the fate of the dollar so long as they control the electorate.

Can you explain to me exactly what you mean by control of the votes? I know something of the processes and procedures by which at least one of our major political parties operates. But I am unaware of any such control - at least in any manner that seems consistent with the context of your statement.

Quote

Principled resistance, and gathering sufficient numbers to sufficiently resist the edicts spewing from the legislature is far more effective. And it does not lead you to look like a hypocrite, even when you are not intentionally being one.

I don't mind appearing a hypocrite to people I believe are acting the fool. Probably not any more than you may be concerned appearing a fool to those you think are being hypocrites.

Quote

Thus the last time I voted (I once believed as you) was in 2000. I will never do so again, but I will continue to do anything I can within and without the framework of their paradigm to subvert and trivialize their involvement. The emperor has no clothes but those he stole. But he also stole all the money, and claims all the power. This cannot be allowed to go unchallenged, and you cannot challenge it by participating in a farcical ritual designed to keep you quiet.

'This farcical ritual' does nothing to keep me quiet. Again, you seem to be seeing this as an either/or, mutually-exclusive mode of operation. It is not.