John,

That is a good question.  First, I know why I didn’t vote whether or not the elite do.  I can only control my actions and I made what I believe to be the only moral choice in this situation.  As to the elite seeing it, I try to spread the word by explaining to as many people as possible why they should not vote.  The elite then see that web sites like LewRockwell, The Daily Bell, Strike The Root, etc.. are becoming more popular which scares them.  This is why they want to control the internet, not because of porn or other excuses.  The fact that the elite cannot distinguish anti-voters from non-voters works in our favor.  The sea of apathy scares the elite almost as bad because it undermines the legitimacy of the puppets used to rule us.  People who don’t care about voting also don’t care about who rules them and are therefore more likely to see those rulers as illegitimate.  The smaller the number of people voting, the smaller the number of people that exhibit faith in those rulers.  So apathy is actually our ally in undermining the legitimacy of our rulers.  So are jokes that make politicians look like the fools they are.  Comedians may not be anarchists, but when they make fun of pompous tyrants they are our allies.

Consider whether it matters to the outcome of an election in a district with a population of 1,000,000 between Candidate A and Candidate B if 100 people vote or 1,000,000 people vote.  There is still only a choice between one pro-government stooge and another pro-government stooge of which one will win.  The outcome is irrelevant to changing the system although obviously the spoils of the system will be divided differently among the various friends of either A or B.  But if only 100 people think enough of the system to show their support for the foundation of the political process, the legitimacy of the system is undermined.  Nobody really cares about the election, so nobody really cares about the winner or what rules the winner wants to enforce.  This apathy/protest leads to increased threats of violence such as laws to make people vote.  This naked aggression leads to a downward spiral of decreasing legitimacy and more agitated resistance.  Elite will then see their political power waning.

On the other hand, say all 1,000,000 sheeple show up to “do their duty”.  You may or may not get the same winner; but again it really doesn’t matter that much.  Choosing the puppet de jure wasn’t the purpose.  Since everybody showed up, the support for the system is crystallized.  Talk of legitimacy goes off the radar.  Of course we all love the government because we all participated in the fundamental ritual crowning of the ruler’s agent/puppet.  Elite see their political power go off the charts.  Lots of flag waving, parades and events then reinforce this perception.  In the end, legitimacy is all about perception and the willingness of individuals to leave the herd to claim their liberty.

Part of the ruse is that Candidate A and Candidate B represent competing positions.  Part of the old divide and conquer strategy.  Keep the peasants arguing over trivial BS and they never question those chains around their ankles.  It’s like a group that is only allowed to drink colas and the people are allowed to vote for their favorite cola.  Everybody has to drink the same cola after the election.  The two-party system is rigged so that Coke and Pepsi are automatically on the ballot and third colas like RC, Chek, Star, etc. have to go through extra procedural hoops to get elected.  So political parties grow up around each one with people who like Coke saying that if we have to drink Pepsi again, the world will suck, and vice versa.  These people honestly and wholeheartedly love Pepsi and/or Coke.  They alternate winning and losing.

Some are not happy with this limited choice and work very hard to get RC elected thinking that will make a difference, but never does.  It is because they are still pro-cola and have faith in the system.  After generations of this system becoming accepted as “the way it is” anybody who suggests that we drink orange juice or water or milk or anything else are looked at as rebels.  But anybody who suggests that people be free to choose whatever they want to drink are “anarchists” who want to challenge the system itself.  Those who have spent their lives ”working within the system” see freedom as “chaos” that will never work.  As people either protest by not voting, or just think the whole system is stupid and not worth the trouble of voting, the number of people supporting the system declines.  This continues until enough people don’t care what the few idiots still voting for everyone to drink Pepsi or Coke or even RC do.  We drink what we want and don’t care who wins the stupid election.  Those within the system will resort more and more to laws that make people vote and enforce the old laws that make you drink only cola.  Thus the legitimacy of the election results is undermined and people will move on with their lives; both brave and apathetic.  Of course many will cling to their traditions for traditions sake, but they will get old and die.  Admittedly, this may take a long time.  It may also result in short term increased violence from the die-hard Cola-ists.

I hope this helps.

Mark

Need more convincing?

This is the kind of stuff you're missing by not joining HaleBobb