Let me fail!
Some days ago, I was involved in the usual discussion with some friends that are committed to voting, under the assumption that voting is the natural action of Democracy. By expressing their vote, they still think they are “deciding” how the country policies and government should be carried out.
Me, again, once more, for the infinite time, I kept my position of abstention as the only reasonable, given the current circumstances.
One of my friends then posted something on FB like : “Please let me fail!”.
At first I thought he was in his right to make his choice, even if it meant a failure. But then, after a second thought, I wondered if that was actually so. For if he was already assuming he would fail, shouldn’t he be concerned about the consequences his decision would mean to the rest of us?
Shouldn’t he be allowed to fail, but only in his own private matters?
Living out of Eden 
26/03/2012 at 09:23
Interesting Ricardo. Failure is a choice, if a fellow chooses a path then let us respect his choice. Should it directly harm others, then yes it is wrong. However, should it not directly affect others then it is not an issue.
As to democracy, I have not voted now for ten years. I refuse to participate in a sham. It is an illusion sold to the masses. Nothing more, nothing less.
I lean more towards Tolstoy with time and age. It seems Christian anarchy offers some hope. The love of Christ, the limitations on extremist behaviour imposed by Christianity when Christ’s, not the churches, teachings are adhered to.
That said, libertarianism seems to offer more hope for mankind. After all what are borders? Self imposed boundaries to protect an elite who control via fear.
I feel there are no answers really. Greed and wanton behaviour always seem to pollute purity of thought and deed, men exploit the goodness of others calling it weakness. That said I feel Voltaire was on the right path when he said to defend the views of others is right, even if you do not agree with those views.
Whatever, I feel John Locke is essential reading for all, for in his writings Jefferson found the basis for the US Constitution, Magna Carta and The English Bill of Rights count as the guide stones for me.
I know we differ on many things, however I offer my thoughts to all in friendship.
26/03/2012 at 14:42
26/03/2012 at 14:43
http://emergingvisualists.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/will-democrat-herb-stencil/
26/03/2012 at 15:03
‘There are no answers, really‘.
That could be the answer.
In Asturias we have won this last elections:
– PSOE obtained 159,811 votes, being the most voted list
– A smashing total of 396,810 people who had the right to did not vote
Does it -an abstention of 44.08%!- in ANY single way to this pervert system?
Come back to the first line if you want to know the answer…
26/03/2012 at 15:06
(Does it -an abstention of 44.08%- affect in ANY single way this pervert system?)
Sorry for the mistaken writing.
26/03/2012 at 15:58
No Liki it does not. Parties in Britain are elected to power on less than 40% of a national vote.
In Australia it has been made compulsory for all to vote, such was the level of avoidance. Now that is a perversion.
26/03/2012 at 20:32
Ahhh back from work!
@John, the more I try to expand my thoughts, the more people come back to me with ideas “to help” me in my supposed dilemma. Whilst I’m only trying to expose the facts in the more maieutic possible way, people don’t manage to imagine another feasible scenario or landscape. Yes, I’m afraid you’re right. There’s no answer.
@The Translator: more than a thousand words.
@ Liki: my friend, hadn’t there be an answer, I will still keep on going, I won’t put my arms down. Abstention is only the beginning. When we are babies, the first thing we learn to express is “NO”. As a Society, we must learn how to say NO, without any fear.
26/03/2012 at 20:40
Ricardo, maybe the journey is all there is? I do not know. However, the reading will keep you busy 🙂
26/03/2012 at 21:31
I’m sure it’s all there is. But there must be more to lifw than reading .. 😀
27/03/2012 at 10:15
🙂 Yes there is, maintaining your liberty, independence and free thought. Growing your own food and raising your children in a way that makes them question everything.
Avoiding usury and trading with others in an honest and open manner.
Following your chosen religion without forcing it on others.
Finally, you must be willing to defend these things with your life if necessary.
Kept me busy for a long, long time 🙂
27/03/2012 at 20:54
Meeeee?
28/03/2012 at 10:26
Why not? 🙂
28/03/2012 at 20:25
I meant, did I keep you busy?
😉
29/03/2012 at 10:02
Oh! Sorry, well yes you stretch my mind somewhat. Abstract thought has never been my forte 🙂
29/03/2012 at 21:13
La precariedad laboral es una forma de chantaje legal; pero por legal no es menos chantaje. ¿Dónde quedó aquello tan útil de «el espíritu de la Ley»? Ya sé que, parece, esto no viene a cuento de nada, pero es la verdad; y la verdad, si algo tiene de curioso, es que siempre viene a cuento de algo aunque no lo parezca.
29/03/2012 at 21:27
Confío en que llegaré a ver ese “algo”, pero mientras, noto en tu interrogación, cierta nostalgia de un pasado que, en realidad, nunca fue. El “espíritu de la Ley” puede haber tenido tanto de legítimo, como la prédica de una iglesia acartonada y escenográfica, que jamás practicó lo que predicó. Por eso no quedó en ningún lado. Fue simplemente un artilugio. Una visión. Un espejismo. O bien, otra demostración de fe de nuestros mayores que fueron quienes nos contaron esa historia.
Leí hace poco sobre un “termómetro” que señalaba que cuantas más leyes tiene un estado, más corrupto es.