The Corrupt Voter

Why we get exactly what we ask for

We love pointing out the corruption in our politicians, but no one seems to be addressing the corruption in the voter, the source of state corruption in the first place.

Context

Politicians aren’t creating corruption; they are simply responding to it. The ruling class isn’t the source of institutional corruption; it’s simply supplying the demand for it, simply responding to free-market pressures to an overwhelmingly vibrant market for corruption.

Even as a hardcore anti-government voluntaryist/consentist, I have come to accept that this immoral, inefficient statist society we live in is the result of the free market: it’s EXACTLY what we — collectively — want; freely and voluntarily. Nobody forces our tyrannical governments on us; they exist solely because we crave statist systems of threat-based enforcement, so we play along with their invisible “authority”. This is why I focus more on psychological and spiritual development rather than “foolproof ways to organise society without government”. Disproving the need for a centralised, threat-based government, although extremely easy to do, is useless without the necessary mindset and belief systems of a critical mass of people in a given society.

But still, the human condition, our frail nature not of our choosing, is irredeemably flawed if it can so easily fall for corruption, if we can so predictably be traumatised by abuse, which we then instinctively feel compelled to spread to others like a virus, traumatising each other, corrupting each other.

And here we are: in an easily corruptible vessel — the human body and mind — trying to make sense of it all, hoping there’s an incorruptible element to us that is beyond this physical and mental plane of frailness: a soul, perhaps.

The reality of voting

We vote to enforce our will on others via violence. That’s it. Common-sense laws do not require a government at all; we don’t vote to protect ourselves against theft and murder, which we can better do without a disincentivised, artificially enforced monopoly of public services, the state.

No, we don’t vote for common-sense laws; the free market is more efficient and responsive to lawmaking than any state could ever be. Instead, we vote to enforce arbitrary public policies on matters that aren’t up for voting by anyone, for example, what someone else’s kids should be forced to be indoctrinated with, or which wars someone should be forced to fund with their labour, forcing blood on their hands.

We do this evil to each other using the apparatus of government, this satanic, falsely perceived “authority”, which we all know deep down is arbitrary and illegitimate, yet we’re too cowardly, or perhaps, too opportunistic to call out the emperor’s non-existent new clothes.

And we are unaccountable for the evil of voting, since the vote is anonymous and legally unbinding. When a war voters voted for ends up being catastrophic and atrocious (they all are, win or lose), no voter is held accountable, no voter pays a price for the evil they condoned… no… demanded with their demonic incantation; the vote.

We vote on things that should never be up for a vote and in areas that are none of our business, where we have no skin in the game, and where we don’t put our money where our mouth is.

Voters are nosy busybodies who presume they have a say in how other people get to live their lives, justifying the vote with bullshit slippery slope “arguments” that can apply to anything, most of all the act of voting.

Not only do we not have to pay the price for the policies we vote for, but we demand that others do instead. And when these policies fail (all public policies do in the end), we deny our accountability in them and deflect our responsibility by again voting for yet another policy, forcing others to burden themselves with the adverse consequences. Voted for, and therefore condoned immense public spending to “increase military power” to get your gay, tribal-supremacy sentiments tingle? Others are forced to pay for the fallout of the resulting inflation from the state’s money supply manipulations, or of economic suppression from increased taxation.

---

Defining voting

Let’s face it: voting is a euphemism for officialised corruption and the rule of violence.

Democracy is a euphemism for the law of the jungle: the powerful (or the many) get to do whatever the fuck they want to the rest; the “might is right” satanic immorality so abundantly taught to children through the ghastly, demonic story of Abraham.

And non-democratic states are exactly the same: they cannot be sustainable unless a critical mass of people are on board with the totalitarianism of the state, and therefore, agree never to call out the nudity of the emperor, the undeniable fact that every single state is illegitimate. People under overt dictatorships practically vote every day with their compliance; so do I with mine, which is why I am also guilty of statism by submitting to its threat of violence. But at least you have to hand it to overt dictatorships: they are more honest than the hypocrisy of democracy.

With “democracy”, we sell our vote to the highest bidder in exchange for privileges at the expense of others — others who also hope to benefit from the apparatus of government on the backs of the rest.

The state is predators preying on each other, hoping to out-prey each other through the monster of the state they create with their evil ambitions, but instead, the state becomes the apex that preys on them all.

This is what democracy is: people pitting themselves against each other over who will manage to exploit whom the most. It’s like a big poker game by which we all agree to fuck each other based on the hand life randomly deals us, and on our ability to bluff with our perceived “authority”. But in the end, we are all exploited by those who run the game, the big casino of the ruling class, whom we alone empower with our corruption. When you gamble, you will never win against the house, not long-term, and there is no stupider and more reckless gambit than submitting to government. Sure, the house will occasionally let you enjoy your small wins to encourage you to keep playing, but long-term, you always lose against the house with mathematical certainty.

This is why we suffer exploitation: because we slyly seek to exploit others first. And karma is a bitch. This is why I don’t complain about government corruption anymore. I expect it. I believe it’s fair, that we — as a whole — deserve it; it’s actually less punishment than what we actually deserve.

This is why I roll my eyes whenever I see people protesting the government, and by doing so, reinforcing its perceived “legitimacy”, since they are still recognising its “authority” to do things for the people.

Protesting or petitioning the government is like asking the emperor to straighten up his collar, when we all know he’s not wearing any clothes.

We rush to blame the government for the ills of society that it was meant to fix but never does, despite its almost unlimited resources. At the same time, we have no problem looking to government to solve our problems for us, which is how we create problems in the first problem.

Government, while meant to be the cure, is actually the disease.

Objection

This is where state-worshippers accuse me of hypocrisy for opposing the state while using its public “services”. I don’t know, was Edmond Dantès condoning his false imprisonment (forced upon him “democratically” by a perceived majority, no less), just because he ate the food he was given at Château d’If? Sure, I have no option but to use the pitiful excuse of government “services” because they are a violently imposed artificial monopoly, like a prisoner having no choice but to eat prison food, that doesn’t mean that the prisoner condones his imprisonment. But the prisoners who imagine they can never get any food, lodging, healthcare or whatever outside of prison deserve prison are the ones who condone their imprisonment. These are the deservingly imprisoned.

The question is: what is the opportunity cost? What potential services are being displaced, and I am being denied, by the artificial, violently imposed monopoly of pitiful public “services” by the state?

Everyday corrupt voters

Farmers

Take, for example, farmers protesting government policies that go against them, but have no issue using the apparatus of government when they gleefully receive agricultural subsidies and protectionist regulations: interventions that suppress the economy at the expense of the economy as a whole.

All economic interventionism suppresses the economy and decelerates the economic cycle, which translates into… you guessed it… unemployment and poverty. Next time you see “the poor” and ask government to do something about them, don’t. Government is what creates poverty and wealth inequality in the first place. Irrefutable economic data prove this fact: the more the state intervenes with taxation, restrictions, and favourable regulations towards the highest bidding bribers (lobbyists), the more the wealth inequality. I won’t cite sources like a gay fact checker with delusionary appeals to “authority” and deflections of accountability; you’re smart enough to witness and cross-check this claim yourself.

Protectionists

Look at people protesting inflation, but have no problem with tariffs and other protectionist restrictions that benefit their own local oligopoly at the expense of a thriving local and global economy for all. Look at professionals protesting government regulation when it destroys their industry, but had no problem using government to pass licensing laws and other barriers to entry for competition, thus forcefully oligopolising their sector.

Nepotists

Look at the government employee protesting increasingly higher living costs after she used nepotism and other corrupt networking to secure a useless position in government that doesn’t produce anything while consuming taxes from people who actually produce value in the economy.

Competitors

Look at the business owner who complains about government over-regulating and restricting his business when the same person gladly received government funding and bribed government bureaucrats to approve his licenses, and to reject his competitors’, thus securing a local monopoly for himself.

Look at the small business owner who complains about corporate tax increases but applauds the state for forcing his competitors to stay closed on Sundays.

“Freedom” lovers

Look at the COVID lockdown protester who (rightfully so) protested tyrannical measures yet still applauds government ruining people’s lives with victimless crimes like owning and consuming certain plants, all somehow “justified” with nonsense slippery slopes and straw-man “arguments” just because he “doesn’t feel safe around druggies”.

You don’t feel safe around drug users? Bitch, I don’t feel safe around power-tripping, trigger-happy cops and the drug gangs they inevitably create by forcing the drug market into the black-market underground.

Brutalisers

Look at the state brutaliser (police or military) who complains about “illegal immigration” when it’s the same state he empowers with his violence that deliberately enables, invites, and funds predatory, welfare-abusing faux-immigration for the purpose of subverting its population for greater control — control for which the brutalising class are paid to enforce.

Infuriatingly insane, schizophrenic-level hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance.

I could go on and on…

Conclusion

You see, we love it when government works in our favour at the expense of others, but we hate it when it works for others at our expense.

You can’t have a state that only you benefit from. The same state that you hope will exploit others for you — be it with welfare, subsidies, favourable regulations — will also exploit you in favour of others in a million ways you cannot even foresee.

It’s naive to presume that only you can exploit others via the apparatus of government, and that neither others nor the state will return the favour tenfold.

We prey on each other through the state, and we all end up preyed upon by each other, but most of all, by those who control the apparatus of government more than we imagine we do.

With government, you gamble, and you lose, always. I have little sympathy for gamblers because they are guilty of greed, and they have no problem receiving when they win, which means others lose.

Next time you think of complaining about a government-induced problem, try to think who it benefits at your expense. Or rather, try to think of what government benefits you receive that trample on others. If you are honest with yourself, that is.

Let’s not pretend to value honesty and then bury our heads in the sand; voting is corruption manifest.

If you asked for the package deal of government, knowing full well what the inevitable drawbacks are, then don’t complain about the drawbacks. You asked for them.

What you can do

Send this article to every serial voter you know, left or right, centre or alleged “libertarian”. It doesn’t matter what brand or colour your brand of authoritarianism is. If you vote, especially for the inexcusable “excuse” of every atrocity in history — the greatest evil of the “lesser” evil — you are an authoritarian wannabe-tyrant, and we, the less insane ones, should call you out on it. Socialists (nazis & communists alike) are at least honest about their totalitarian predispositions. Democracy worshippers? Not so much.