---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the next few months, students should not be surprised to see mass E-Mails, commercials, and patronizing statements from celebrities telling the youth of
Already we have begun to see this: rapper and producer Will.i.am released a Youtube video a few days before Super Tuesday starring a bunch of celebrities, ranging from Kareem Abdul-Jabbar to Common, confusingly singing/rapping/talking along to a speech by Barack Obama. But at least Will.i.am isn’t pretending to do anything other than support a specific candidate. In that sense, at least, he is a step above his peers. I don’t think I need to be telling anyone that they shouldn’t be supporting a candidate based on what celebrities endorse him or her: I hope to God that this is already blindingly obvious to all of you. However, I reject the notion that anyone’s vote is a) the most important civic duty one can do for his or her country, or b) the best way to change the course of the nation.
There are several legitimate reasons to not vote. Emphatically not among them, I feel, is the notion that your vote will not matter in the grand scheme of things. While this is almost always a correct assumption to make, not casting a vote isn’t likely to change that, unless several million people follow your lead. Similarly, I don’t think that being lazy or uninterested in the political process is a very legitimate rationale either. Not voting, to me, can be seen as a form of civil disobedience, especially useful if you just can’t stand the way we go about electing public officials.
Say, to take an obvious reason, that you simply don’t like any of the candidates present on the ballot. That is as good a reason as any to not vote, although a good amount of Americans seem to feel that a vote for the lesser evil is always the best policy, a position that could easily be refuted by citing several examples in world history. Or say that you simply want to have nothing to do with a bipartisan system of government that effectively squashes any chance for a third party to get a say at anything, and is often criticized (Ralph Nader) for trying to do so. Or say that you can’t support anything having to do with the Electoral College, and can’t understand why we don’t just make it a “majority-rules” election. Again, there is no reason to support such a system if you don’t believe in it, so not voting is a way of passive resistance.
The prospect of not voting in this coming election is relevant to me because it seems likely that the next democratic nominee will be Hillary Clinton, a person with whom I have several policy differences. What’s more, I am disturbed by the idea of having spent my entire life in a country caught in a warring Bush/Clinton dynasty (although I did spend the first two years of my life under Reagan, which blessedly I don’t remember). Considering I always felt I lived in a democracy (yes, I know—the joke’s on me), I’m a bit predisposed to the idea that anyone can become president, even if they don’t happen to have a certain last name. This isn’t probably true, though, so it might come to the point where I choose either a third party or even none of the above. There’s nothing wrong with that, and I defy anyone to prove to me why wasting my time voting for someone I don’t even like would be better spent than, say, sitting at home and playing video games.
Voting is not the be-all, end-all of your civic duty to
Honestly, chances are I will vote, not only because I view it as a way to be civically engaged but also because I genuinely enjoy the process. However, it is important to understand that there is absolutely no correlation between a low voter turnout and a badly managed government. To label nonvoters as simply apathetic and ignorant is silly. To coerce, bribe, or simply guilt people into voting—whether it’s by sending mass E-Mails or having popular bands recite ridiculously corny speeches—is undemocratic. The best way to get young people to vote is to stick to the issues and allow them to come to their own conclusions, and if that means choosing alternate methods of fighting the system, so be it.
7 comments:
I understand where you're coming from, but I'm kind of sick of people criticizing "Vote or Die." Instead of blaming Paris and Diddy for a campaign they simply attached their faces to, why not blame the ad firm who made the slogan? They were just trying to attach a snappy phrase to an effort to get youth voter turnout. I think it's admirable to target specific voting blocs-- Black people, youth, etc.-- who traditionally don't have huge voter turnout, mostly because of other reasons besides demonstrating civil disobedience. Yes, not voting is a right that we need to all have, but at the same time you cannot deny that the democracy that you put so much faith in (and I put next to zero faith in, btw) would be most effective if EVERY group (not every person mind you) had a say in how things are run? As it is, old white people actually have the best voter turnout, the way it has been for decades. The truth is that the youth vote doesn't actually mean jack shit, and it never has-- the only reason that Democratic candidates focus on it is because they want to be seen as an alternative to the old, stodgy GOP.
I think where your argument fails is that you seem to think that somewhere along the line, someone said that voting is the *only* way to demonstrate your civic duty. If you can cite anyone who has ever said that, please include a link in your blog. Also, your assumption that "anyone can be President" is really delusional. Anyone can be president...as long as they are obscenely wealthy and they tell a lot of lies. I for one could never be President because I am poor and I tell the truth too often. Anyway, even though there has been no explicit "Volunteer or Die" campaign, there have been TONS of campaigns to get young people in particular to volunteer; surely you have heard of Do Something and other programs like it. Most college campuses have a huge push to community involvement, just not at Cornell because there is nothing to do in Mt. Vernon.
Also, I think that the "Yes We Can" video was not as bad as you think it was. It was not an attempt to guilt people into voting, and I think that will.i.am would agree. It's ridiculous to think that anyone anywhere would ever be able to be guilted into voting, and if they can, that's their own problem because they obviously do not have strong wills. But I think it's very admirable that so many people with recognizable names and faces are attaching them to political causes. If I were famous, I would do the same thing because it's nice to use your own voice to reflect your personal beliefs. However, I have often debated whether or not celebrity endorsements are entirely sincere or if they are some sort of PR simulacrum. Personally, I think it makes more sense for celebrities to endorse voter registration and voting in general because that's something that matters for anyone, no matter what party affiliation they have.
Lastly, I would like to point out that if you don't agree with a bipartisan system, not voting is the stupidest thing you can do in protest. One would have to be a complete moron to not vote because of that. The most effective way to combat that CLEARLY is to vote for a third party candidate. And the reason that we don't make it a winner-take-all system is pretty obvious: If we did that, candidates would focus on large states like NY or CA and would ignore states with smaller populations. These arguments are all fine on the surface, but if you scratch a little bit deeper, you can actually debunk them pretty easily.
Look, I don't think anyone should be forced to vote by the state. That's ridiculous. But I don't see anything wrong with ad campaigns asking people to vote. We live in a free country, one that idolizes freedom of speech (a right that you in particular seem to place on a pedestal), which means that people have the right to get on their soapboxes and ask people to vote. You have to remember that you are a white male, and as such, you have ALWAYS had the right to vote; that is a luxury that you and others like you don't really appreciate. But women and African-Americans fought and DIED for people like me to be able to vote. Kids in our generation feel disconnected from that process, but it's important that we don't take it for granted. Besides, instead of simply NOT voting, there are a million things to do to participate in democracy and also protest the electoral college/bi-partisan system.
My response is disjointed and ill-thought out, but it's because I'm watching an episode of Saved by the Bell: The College Years in which Slater identifies with being Chicano for the first time ever and gets mad at Zack for not caring about it because he is white. It reminded me of arguments I have had with you.
"Vote or Die" is a stupid phrase, very pointedly parodied by South Park, because it's Diddy trying in vain to come up with a way to equate voting with being a badass. NaS has mocked the campaign for being essentially dishonest:
http://www.the411online.com/nas.html
Also, it's not a snappy phrase. What the hell kind of phrase is "Vote or Die" anyway? I could have come up with that, but I would immediately have thought it to be stupid.
It would be admirable to target specific voting blocs that have not voted much in the past if that were actually true. Almost always, the groups that target black people, youth vote, etc. are Democratic advocacy groups and there is nothing (small d) democratic about pushing an agenda by having them align their politics to a group they don't necessarily agree with, simply for the "greater good" or whatever. You can say that old white people win presidential campaigns because they are fundamentally dishonest, but two wrong do not make a right.
If you can cite any situations where Diddy has said you should get out and help your community, maybe you should provide a link. I just don't see how any of these people can imagine changes being made in terms of health care, racial inequality, etc. simply by voting.
The "Yes We Can" video was silly and confusing, as well as extremely corny. Obviously celebrities have the freedom to talk about whatever they want, I just wish they wouldn't be so sure that their opinions are going to be what gets people into the polls. Endorsing voter registration is one thing, just being like "Vote, it's better than not voting" is stupid because obviously some voting choices will end up with greater changes than others. The solution is not to tell people what to do, but provide them with information. The whole point of this article is that it is quite possible to be quite informed and active in public policy while choosing to not vote.
There's no reason to vote for a third-party candidate if you don't think any of them would be a good president. I don't think there are any, except maybe Nader.
Originally this article also discussed places in the world where voting is mandatory (like Australia) but I cut that out. Also, you are not even remotely poor and Barack Obama is a person I believe probably tells the truth at least most of the time. The only difference between you and him is that you are a flagrant asshole, and that's probably why you couldn't be president.
Okay, but saying that Diddy is trying to do anything (even be a badass) by saying "Vote or Die" is attributing it to the wrong person!!! Diddy most likely did NOT come up with this himself; he was attached to this by a publicist or ad agency. Therefore, attacking him personally for this makes absolutely no sense. It is important to get out the youth vote. How can you deny this?
I am not going to provide links to Diddy saying anything about volunteering, because I never claimed that he said anything like that. My argument on that point was and still is that it is silly to attack one person or one campaign for a very meaningless effort. That makes absolute sense, and it is unfounded. If you can show me someone who was actively offended/hurt/betrayed by "Vote or Die," then be my guest. Otherwise it is a nonissue and nothing more. It's over, and it hasn't been revived. Either someone found it was stupid like you did or it outlived its usefulness. Why talk about it now?
I do not see why you called me an asshole (because I disagreed with your specific points?) but I challenge you to run for president with the amount of money I have in my bank account. You'd probably get to the end of the block and that's all. Most politicians-- even at the municipal level-- tend to be extremely wealthy and they have to make tremendous compromises in order to be more palatable to the general public. Obama may say some version of the truth, but he is not as outspoken as someone like Kucinich who did not compromise that bullshit concept of "electability" just to get finances. like it or not, that's part of the game. Politics is a game, a shitty game that EVERYONE loses. No matter who we vote for, America is still a fucked up country that repeatedly exploits other countries for economic and military gain. We still have the SOA and the race to the bottom and the casualties of capitalism. People like Paul Wellstone get killed and people like Hillary rise to the top. It's no surprise, since the American govt suppresses dissenting voices all the fucking time; if you don't think that's true then you are painfully naive.
Also putting not voting in the category of "civil disobedience" is a mistake. Civil disobedience implies lawbreaking and since voting is not compulsory, this comparison makes absolutely zero sense. It's kind of an insult to people who actively disrupted the system, like Gandhi or MLK to lump such an explicitly passive action into a category with them.
I still dont see anything wrong with GOTV campaigns. Rock the Vote and Vote or Die (which wasn't a campaign so much as a slogan on a fucking tshirt) have absolutely NO political leanings. Voter registration just happens to be a Democratic push because they know that they tend to get more votes from underserved communities. Nothing wrong with that, but if you can show me any GOTV drive that explicitly tells people to vote for a specific party, please do so, as you have still not provided any evidence for these very vague and accusatory generalizations you are making. Also, if you can give me evidence of anyone saying (implicitly or otherwise) that voting is THE way to change things like health care and racial inequality, please provide it as the burden of proof is on you. You are selling young voters short by thinking that most of them don't recognize the fact that GOTV campaigns are just that: Created to get out the vote and nothing more. It's one piece of a puzzle and the pieces come from other places. That's as bad as saying that organizations like Young People for The American Way or Do Something only think that change can come about through community activism and are thus encouraging people not to vote. Silly, and also inaccurate.
You are ignoring a large bit of reality in order to make the claims you are making. Sorry, but the way that presidential campaigns work is largely fueled by publicity these days. You act as if Scarlett Johansen goes out and says one day "I think I will endorse Barack Obama," and then it is so. More likely, Obama's representatives do extensive research, figure out who is ripe for the picking and who voters will respond to and ask them to endorse him. There is more quid pro quo going on than you will admit to for some reason. You are also taking autonomy away from voters. You would have a point if people were putting guns to people's heads and making them vote, but you don't have a leg to stand on really because celebrities-- ubiquitous as they may be-- have no actual control over whether or not people vote. If people listen to will.i.am, they are fucking dumbasses, point blank. Celebrity endorsements mean next to nothing (this is not just me, but a lot of polls have indicated this) and the only thing that they produce is more facetime and free publicity for the candidate. Nobody makes their choice over who Diddy endorses or what Diddy does. You say people should be provided with information, but wouldn't that lead into even more of a problem, based on what you are saying? Who really wants Diddy out there telling me Hillary's policies? I'd think of that as even more of a slap in the face than anything else. And besides, there are great places for voters to get information, not just candidates websites, but also these things called newspapers, radio and television. They are all biased and have their own slants, but the internet definitely produces a more democratic (small d) forum for people who are stupid enough to listen to celebrities telling them to vote and who to vote for.
Maybe you should have included the part about Australia. You also could have mentioned the fact that national elections are just one part of the political landscape and that not voting in them doesn't mean you can't be politically active. This article is well written but very poorly supported and structured, and kind of all over the place with the points. For example, you talk about "Vote or Die" on a very surface level, and it is seemingly for no apparent reason. Just because you do not like the phrase doesn't mean that it was not effective. It mobilized people to vote for whatever reason, and that is always a good thing! I say this not to knock you because I really like reading what you write, but I am saying this because you ostensibly started this blog as not only a platform for your ideas but as a forum for critique. If that's not true, then I apologize, and you can delete this. However, verbally attacking someone through namecalling is not a proper way to run a blog (especially one dealing with politics, where you are likely to hear dissenting voices). It makes people not want to comment and that makes things far, far less interesting. Personal attacks are uncalled for-- especially in this case-- and they're extremely childish. I urge you to think about what you say because this is a community and not a private conversation. If you want to attack me personally, please do it via email. Otherwise, please stick to the issues at hand and stay away from personal matters.
It's important to you personally to get out the youth vote because then it is more likely that people you personally approve of can get into office. Don't try to deny this. There's always an implicit political agenda going on with all of these groups, even Diddy's. You don't care at all what they happen to know about a particular problem or subject as long as they can be shepherded into the polling booth.
As I pointed out in my article, the very phrase "Vote or Die" is offensive to anyone who has ever lost their life defending a cause they believe in--it's a stupid phrase, but its implicit message, whether or not it is intended, is that if you don't vote you are somehow subhuman. That was what I was trying to say. I don't know if Diddy is keeping up the tag anymore or even if it ended up mattering, but it's still a stupid thing to say.
Yes, by presidential candidate standards you are not rich, but to call yourself "poor" when you have a salary far greater than the average American is a slap in the face to actually impoverished people. Duh. And don't tell me Paul Wellstone was somehow pure because he was killed before he had a chance to be in office. If everyone lies, why is he an exception?
Civil disobedience to me means the active rejection of American values and customs, not just laws. If you want to get into a semantics battle with me I just don't care. And to say not voting is explicitly passive--it's no more passive, I guess, than organizing a sit-down protest.
Even as it stands, there are not enough avenues for information, and there is no reason to vote if you are not informed. That was basically my deal. And you couldn't be more of a massive hypocrite than you already proved to be in that last paragraph. I don't call you an asshole because I disagree with you, I call you an asshole because you pour beer all over my floor and several important papers just to be a jerk.
Please keep personal attacks confined to a private forum and refrain from putting your business out in the streets.
i agree...why are you so visciously attacking this woman for expressing her opinoins? the private matters you have between yourselves are best kept PRIVATE and it is really poor form to air dirty laundry on the internet.
nice blog, but very ridiculous comments being made to readers/commenters. you should be ashamed of yourself.
Post a Comment