Pep Talk

Tomorrow, for the first time since 2004, I’m going to vote. In 2000 and 2004 I voted for the Libertarian candidate because that political system pleased my white high-IQ sensibilities even though it (by it I mean I) was ignorant and and unworkable.

Sarah Palin was a deal-breaker for me. She was a logical conclusion of women’s suffrage, but as I said I was ignorant until I realized we were about to elect a female to be vice president; which is like the internship for president. I have principles, but I also have fundamentals. I’d vote for a socialist man before I’d vote for a female. So I didn’t vote and the habit took.

Democracy is a terrible way to choose leaders who are several steps removed from yourself, but it is the way we do it.

I mean, I gotta live here, you know. Robert Francis O’Rourke is a twerp, and hates the white working class.

Advertisements

16 thoughts on “Pep Talk

  1. As an observer from afar and having read you (as well as Scott), it seems this mid-term is exceptionally crucial to the future of your country (and the world). Then again, the government systems human created have never been perfect but that’s what we, humans, deserve.

  2. I feel the same way on preferring to vote for a socialist man over a woman, no matter what she says she believes in. She clearly doesn’t believe in husband rule.
    And if you live in Texas, you should indeed vote, as every year brings more immigrants from Mexico, quickly hastening the day when Texas turns blue for good, a long with Texas, and the opening of the floodgates for good.

  3. I know many who lean libertarian refuse to vote, but that action of not voting does nothing. At least cast an under ballot. That way, you can vote for locals (which actually matters), while sending a message that a certain number of people opted out and didn’t vote for either candidates. I think it would be much more effective for people to cast blank and empty ballots than to not show up. It tells pollsters that you cared, you showed up, and no one was worthy

  4. Looking to be pure in an inherently corrupt system is a false focus. I despise the current Democratic actions and messages that I voted straight Republican ticket last week.

    Lots of people in the early voting line near the end of the day too. Likely a big turnout.

    I also can’t stand the idea of a Kennedy wanna be (Beto) getting in office. Driving drunk is fine, but false claims made up by a woman against a prospective Supreme Court Justice must be believed completely.

    No good solutions, since the system is destined to fail, but the libertarian ideas have shown they are bankrupt.

  5. Billy says:

    No good solutions, since the system is destined to fail

    Every man-made system is designed to fail. That’s not a bug, it’s a feature.

    Humans are fatally flawed because of the sinful nature. Because we’re fatally flawed, everything we make is fatally flawed. That’s the reason every man-made system fails.

    But there’s also a purpose.

    The purpose is to remind us that we’re fatally flawed, and therefore incapable of (collectively) governing ourselves, and therefore need Jesus to return and rule with a rod of iron.

    I’ve been seeing lots of royalists lately, which is hilarious. As if we haven’t tried that before.

    In the meantime, the system we have in the US resulted in a country so great to live in that most of the world wants to live here. I should know. I’m one of those people.

    Few Americans have the first clue about how good they have it, much less why.

  6. @Oscar

    The purpose is to remind us that we’re fatally flawed, and therefore incapable of (collectively) governing ourselves, and therefore need Jesus to return and rule with a rod of iron.

    I’ve been seeing lots of royalists lately, which is hilarious. As if we haven’t tried that before.

    Most royalist arguments strike me as silly, but something to think about: I don’t think Christians have a good argument against kings. Doesn’t Jesus appear to be a royalist? Jesus is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords. If kings and lords are bad ideas, then is Jesus the King and Lord of Bad Ideas? Did St. Peter instruct wives to submit to their own husbands and call them Bad Ideas?

    That doesn’t mean every king is a good king. Some kings need to be overthrown.

    Personally, I like the pre-Norman Anglo-Saxon method of government with a royal line of kings (but no primogeniture) a small group of nobles, a large group of churls (free men who owed allegiance to a noble), and some slaves (those who won’t or can’t take care of themselves). Maybe in practice I’d hate it. The Founding Fathers knowingly hearkened to it in the formation of our government (with the major caveat that they eschewed kings), but that has been steadily eroded. And it is just a fact that the loose Anglo-Saxon organization lost to the tight organization of the Normans. Government is a tricky thing.

    In the meantime, the system we have in the US resulted in a country so great to live in that most of the world wants to live here. I should know. I’m one of those people.

    Few Americans have the first clue about how good they have it, much less why.

    Yes, but things are getting worse and the system is more about WHO is in the the system as WHAT the system is. That’s why I’d rather be ruled by a socialist man over a capitalist woman. God didn’t punish Israel with socialism. He punished them with rule by women and children (same thing)–a type of anarchy.

    And you’re a good American, but as far as I know a lousy example of the typical immigrant. You bought-in to becoming American. You speak the language. You married-in. You bred-in. You served the country. You reverence the Founding Fathers and Myth. This list doesn’t describe most immigrants. You are a good candidate to be an “American Churl”. Most immigrants are not.

  7. The deed is done.

    It’s slightly wonderful that there aren’t more shenanigans at polling stations than sometimes make the news. It’s easy to imagine the methods of corruption. Of course I muse on this from a small city in America’s heartland.

  8. Good for you.

    I remember arguing with Never Trumper conservative friends, saying that if Daniel and Joseph could do service for pagan kings (and if David could fight for the Philistines), Trump is probably not that bad. The fact that the GOP establishment hates him is a pretty ringing endorsement by itself.

    These elections kind of feel like “it” in a way that few others would. The plan really is to replace Americans with “appropriate” immigrants (will vote democrat), until America is just a blue country, forever.

    The dems have gone all in on every failed policy idea and moral abberation (trans kids strikes me as the most evil and insane). This is it. If Florida and Texas go blue that’s all she wrote forever.

  9. @ Cane Caldo

    I don’t think Christians have a good argument against kings.

    True. The only point (not an argument) that I make to royalists is that, if they get their way, their descendants will scream for their king’s head on a pike. And the cycle will perpetuate itself.

    And you’re a good American, but as far as I know a lousy example of the typical immigrant. You bought-in to becoming American. You speak the language. You married-in. You bred-in. You served the country. You reverence the Founding Fathers and Myth. This list doesn’t describe most immigrants. You are a good candidate to be an “American Churl”. Most immigrants are not.

    Thanks for the compliment. I actually had to look up the word “churl”.

    Sadly, I don’t really know why my family and I assimilated so well, and others don’t. Meaning; I wouldn’t know how to select immigrants who assimilate well. I just know that, despite our relative poverty, my parents kept pointing out how good things are here, and how we kids had unlimited opportunity. That made me want to understand why things are so good here.

    Of course, it helped that, starting in high school, I mostly hung out with white guys from blue collar, conservative Christian families. In other words, I learned from the most pro-American, most welcoming, friendliest people in the world.

    Anyway, I also voted. May God have mercy on the USA.

  10. i’m surprised so many christian-manosphere peeps aren’t redpilled about democracy yet

    as a general rule: if 99% of societies did something in the past, and the Bible doesn’t speak out against it, then there’s probably a damn good reason why it happened

  11. @Cane Caldo

    Most royalist arguments strike me as silly, but something to think about: I don’t think Christians have a good argument against kings.

    Doesn’t God try to talk the Israelites out of having a king in the OT? I think you could combine that argument with the NT’s admonition to slaves to serve their masters well but choose their freedom if it is offered. However, the latter is more tangential.

  12. “Doesn’t God try to talk the Israelites out of having a king in the OT?”

    God wanted a theocratic government, yes. Still nowhere near a democracy, or any of the things commonly associated with Western ideals of “liberty”

    besides, one can argue all religiously endorsed monarchies fall between somewhere theocracy and ecclesiocracy (theocracy where leaders do not claim divine revelation)

  13. @Dalrock

    Specifically, God says to Samuel–Israel’s judge–that the Israelites have rejected Him as their king and want a king like the other nations have. And Samuel had appointed his own sons as judges under himself. I believe there’s something specifically wrong with the kings the other nations had that is not about their kingship per se, but how they ruled. Whatever that wrongness was, the Israelites envied it. My guess is the pomp and circumstance.

    I don’t see a clear distinction between a judge and a king except that the Lord appoints a judge by revelation and deed; a sort of Prophet King. If that is an option: I want a judge!

    If it’s not an option, then the closest thing to a judge in Western history is a king. I’m thinking of Moses here also, who appointed men to judge various families. Moses was more like a king than a supreme court justice. He didn’t just pronounce, but had the power to proclaim and enforce.

    What support is there in the Bible for top-to-bottom national democracy with universal suffrage?

  14. @ white

    God wanted a theocratic government, yes. Still nowhere near a democracy, or any of the things commonly associated with Western ideals of “liberty”

    You might be surprised. Many of the mechanisms of liberty that most people today think came from the “Enlightenment” actually came from the Pentateuch.

    For example, the presumption of innocence, evidenciary requirements, punishments for false accusers, etc., are mixed into the foundation of liberty. They’re all found in Deuteronomy 19. Not to mention that one of the 10 commandments is “do not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Exodus 20).

    What about economic liberty?

    Economic liberty is founded on two pillars – the sanctity of property, and the sanctity of contracts. Both are also found in the 10 commandments (Exodus 20). Additionally, both concepts are supported throughout the Old Testament.

    Dishonest scales are an abomination (Prov 11).

    Do not move boundary stones (Prov 22)

    What about taxes (a reduction of economic liberty)?

    One of the arguments the prophet Samuel gave against a king was “He will take a tenth of your grain and your vintage, and give it to his officers and servants.” (1 Sam 8) That’s a 10% tax, and Samuel said that like it’s a bad thing. Which means that whatever they were being taxed before they had a king was less than 10%.

    Hey… wait a minute. 10% flat tax? Sign me up as a royalist!

  15. @Cane Caldo

    I don’t see a clear distinction between a judge and a king except that the Lord appoints a judge by revelation and deed; a sort of Prophet King. If that is an option: I want a judge!

    I would have to go back and study this further. But as I read Judges 11 there was at least a democratic aspect of choosing a judge:

    8 The elders of Gilead said to him, “Nevertheless, we are turning to you now; come with us to fight the Ammonites, and you will be head over all of us who live in Gilead.”

    9 Jephthah answered, “Suppose you take me back to fight the Ammonites and the Lord gives them to me—will I really be your head?”

    10 The elders of Gilead replied, “The Lord is our witness; we will certainly do as you say.

    This wasn’t a direct popular vote, it was the elders bestowing authority on Jephthah. And while they installed him as head before the battle, him winning the battle was obviously critical to his rule. On that side, it was God who gave the battle to Jephthah. But even here, there is the muddying of the waters where Jephthah vowed what turned out to be a horrific sacrifice should God give him favor.

    But it was the elders who approached Jephthah and installed him as Judge, not God, and his installation came both before the battle and before the moment we are told God’s spirit came to him.

  16. @Dalrock

    But as I read Judges 11 there was at least a democratic aspect of choosing a judge: […] This wasn’t a direct popular vote, it was the elders bestowing authority on Jephthah.

    The elders are an important distinction between a democratic government and an authoritarian one. The elders make up an oligarchy; similar to the government of the Roman Republic.

    And while they installed him as head before the battle, him winning the battle was obviously critical to his rule. On that side, it was God who gave the battle to Jephthah.

    Yes; deed and revelation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.