Rock the Vote, Don’t Tip the Vote Over
The world used to be a much nicer place. I know this because I’m a man and that means that I read books. Books and dogs and the spirits of liquor are a man’s best friend, whereas a woman’s best friend is a fun house mirror that makes her look even fatter than she is and a tape recorder shaped like a man’s head she can bitch to about it.
The only mistake man ever made was valuing a woman’s opinion at more than the worth of a dead dog. They can’t do shit. They can’t think for shit. What the fuck is the point. Also, women shouldn’t vote.
Here’s a quotable quote for you:
“A sure sign of an empire’s decline is the rise of feminism.”
-Sir John Glubb, 1897-1986
Feminism is that term they used in Deep Impact for that big asteroid that’s going to fuck everything on Earth. I forget what the term is because I’m a man and I have more important things to do than remember or look up the minutiae of some stupid fantasy world. It meant that everything was about to get completely fucked in a terrible way and that’s good enough. Sir John knew this about feminism for one reason: feminism begets women voting and women voting begets a system of government so fucked up that it picks up the platter of civilization and throws it against the wall like a plate of spaghetti in the hands of a petulant toddler.
It’s not because women have haired brained ideas either! Or because the only reason women ever work for a cause is to piss off their fathers and really have absolutely no understanding of the true nature of social activism.
Women vote with their sexual organs. That’s the problem. They don’t even get the chance to fuck up the decision with their heads, which are full of mulch and chicken shit. That sounds like a good thing, but it actually isn’t. It’s actually a bad thing.
Like usual, it’s not women’s fault. Who can blame them for voting with their sex drive? Politicians are powerful, sinister bastards who love babies. Women love that. Of course they’re going to vote for the candidate they’d most like to fuck! It’s the only thing they can think of when they’ve got their pretty little overwhelmed heads in the voting booth and the wand or pencil or chad-puncher or whatever the hell they’re using to vote with in their hand.
Letting women vote is like men shopping when they’re hungry and everything in the store has Elvira on the package. Fuck. Ten packs of frozen corn dogs and fried onions teaches you that’s a stupid idea. Then you don’t do it anymore. With women, it’s the same thing, except their always hungry. Hungry for a sexual carnality that has no place in the processes of government.
Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote. In the best case scenario, it gives married men the advantage of having two votes (because a good wife shuts the hell up and votes with the brain of the family). And that’s bad because being married is a mistake in the first place. Should the government be decided by the betrothed? Those of us bewitched, beguiled, bedeviled by the not as good sex?
No. That’s stupid.
Related Articles:
April 16th, 2006 at 8:40 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76834b71048e0
The biggest flaw with democracy is that all the idiots get to vote.
August 18th, 2006 at 3:49 pm - IP Man-Hash: 4555637db20cf
August 18th, 2006 at 3:58 pm - IP Man-Hash: 732987aa5d932
I am not into politics at all. However, I say that one of two things should be done.
1. Voting should be MANDATORY i.e. everyone should be required to vote.
or
2. You should have to prove your competence, or EARN your right to vote i.e. paying taxes, military service, ect ect. (read Heinlein “Starship Troopers).
–Strength and Honor–
August 18th, 2006 at 7:21 pm - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Indeed. Brilliant book. So you suggest full citizenship (right to vote) be awarded upon completion of military service or tour.
It really seems like a good idea. Wonder what a society built like that would look like. Certainly few if any women voting, that’s for sure.
August 23rd, 2006 at 1:09 pm - IP Man-Hash: fed7ffb1142fd
Or maybe people that do prove their competence should recieve more than one vote. I.E. if you pay your taxes you get one vote, if you complete military service you get two ect ect.
-Strength and Honor-
August 24th, 2006 at 11:48 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Interesting idea, abaddon.
We discussed this back a while ago, in the context (IIRC) of Starship Troopers and Nevil Shute’s novel, In the Wet. Both worth reading, though Starship Troopers has probably aged better.
Shute proposed a multiple voting system based upon accomplishments such as honorable military service, a post-secondary degree, raising two children to the age of 14 without divorcing, etc.
Heinlein himself had other voting proposals in Expanded Universe. The only ones I recall were having to solve a quadratic equation, or, having to deposit a troy ounce of gold.
I don’t see the Starship Troopers solution as applying very well to a highly pacific democracy. It might work well in the US, Britain or France. Any country with a drafted army or militia, forget it, obviously. Of course, it’s also worth remembering that Heinlein characterized this as civil service — which could certainly theoretically include things like the Peace Corps. That still wouldn’t be very effective in a country like, say, Switzerland.
-wolfe
August 24th, 2006 at 7:56 pm - IP Man-Hash: 038b3f7f5976e
However the precept remains for all democracies. I lean torwards a multiple vote system myself. However there has to be a way to prove your competence for multiple votes in different countries. Maybe in a highly economic/industrial country you may get 2 votes for starting and maintaining your own buisness ect ect.
My point being for those that haven’t got it, is that there should be a way for the industrious/producers/whatever to have more say than saaaaay a welfare queen, or some guy that hasn’t had a job for a good portion of his life.
-Strength and Honor-
August 25th, 2006 at 12:30 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
I’m certainly tempted by it, abaddon. Yeah, starting your own business, graduating with highest honors (magna cum laude), getting any post-secondary degree, completing any professional apprenticeship (e.g. electrician, plumber, etc.), being the CEO of a company with more than 10 non-related full-time employees, in the military (or honorable discharge from same), being member of a professional body (doctor, architect, lawyer, engineer)… all those are possible qualifications.
One thing though: you want to ensure that a high degree of social/voter mobility would be possible. In other words, you don’t want to create a caste system with an underclass.
And that point greatly concerns me, and threatens any such proposal.
Well, that and the fact it’s unimplementable. Unless some major country (like one of the G-8) hits the wall financially and semi-collapses.
-wolfe
August 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pm - IP Man-Hash: 6897e3ddf8ad0
abaddon and wolfe, some may argue this system exists and is fact in place and equilibrated against exactly your concerns. What it would be called, I have no idea. What is certainly true is that those with the means have the ability to vote yeay or nay on some acts being legal for them personally and their world. It’s called the high priced attorney.
-Dick
August 25th, 2006 at 11:23 pm - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
I’d never thought of it that way. Of course it’s based entirely upon money (and political influence), so not precisely what I had in mind. That said, it’s a disturbingly good point.
-wolfe
October 30th, 2006 at 5:13 pm - IP Man-Hash: 2f2d948528fdf
i wish i was able to vote. then id vote webb[d] to be VA senator. im so depressed. i really want to go to the fundraiser rally in arlington. thats nearly an hour away. and i can’t drive myself there since i dont have a license, and even if i did i wouldnt be allowed to because it’s arlington. but anyways, yes it’s extremely idiotic how some women just vote for whoever’s better looking, i agree. hard to believe people do that…
October 31st, 2006 at 12:10 am - IP Man-Hash: a5d80956a3e6c
Since when have politicians been good-looking?
October 31st, 2006 at 2:14 am - IP Man-Hash: adf74f2589c44
Since they held power.
-Dick
October 31st, 2006 at 4:44 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Wolfe, I personally view patriotism and libertarians mixing as well as oil and water. In fact, I contend it’s the quintessential oxymoron. Sure, it’s easy to pay lip service to it. I, for instance, should have foregone my education and a year of my life to voluntarily join military training, were I a patriot in the finest sense of the word.
Try and introduce the ‘earned vote’ principle to the American electoral elligible populace and expect a bloody rebellion on your hands as they run amok putting their fantasies of overthrowing domestic tyrannical governments with a .44 into practice. And drill a few ATF skulls (a. k. a. stormtroopers) in the proces.
There is, however, also the remote possibility you’ll be just as amorphous and apathetic as under the current fraudulent administration’s flagrant perversions of government and executive.
October 31st, 2006 at 4:49 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
legislature* and executive
October 31st, 2006 at 5:11 am - IP Man-Hash: 4555637db20cf
Touché!
October 31st, 2006 at 5:54 am - IP Man-Hash: 76cebfba7c181
Thank you for helping me make my mind up. I was leaning to Webb, since I’m not a big fan of Allen, and I rather liked Webb’s book, Born Fighting. I also think Webb’s views on women in the military are excellent. However, if you as a female girl are that strong on Webb, clearly I’ve made an error in my estimation of the man.
Allen it is!
-wolfe
October 31st, 2006 at 6:55 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Note the leal adhesion to the NRA backed fallacious legal interpretation of the second amendment, time and again contradictory to case law and established Supreme Court interpretation of it, as well as his abiding to the NRA’s red carnet heart and soul. Including the assault weapon ban.
It seems military rifles restricted to semi-auto just doesn’t pass muster with gun nuts. I mean, what self respecting ‘milita man’ doesn’t have a .50 browning machine gun and settles for an pansy pants light fifty?
Notice also his blatant lie about the D. C. handgun ban being unconstitutional. As well as his ludicrous idea of firearms on a pressurised aircraft instead of, say, tasers or heave duty stun guns. Neither mace is that good an idea in the confined space of the cockpit.
His other stated political and economical views and inclination point him out to be yet another unscrupulous anarcho-capitalist in the NRA’s pocket.
Coincidence? I think not.
But that ugly mug of his ought to get him more than a few lady electoral constituents. He’s a shoo-in.
October 31st, 2006 at 7:02 am - IP Man-Hash: 980cc8a8ac1a7
Some truly Godless people in that country of yours.
October 31st, 2006 at 9:16 am - IP Man-Hash: f24a9ea7317dd
Yes we could do something so blatantly unconstitutional that would make military an even more powerful force than it has already become. But I have a better idea, see there were smart men untouched by secularism, feminism, marxism or any other dumbfuck lady ideology, these men were called our founders.
A return to constitutional republicanism, where the executive is NOT elected by popular vote mobacracy, where only land owning males can vote their representatives and senators into office.
But, Americans have been neutered and feminized and stripped of their Gods, thus wil soon have no senate or representation but only have popular vote of federal governor/executive who is part of the North American Union, all the fabric of the republic lost completely just to compete with China, and the EU.
Pathetic.