a moment of punditry

[kodalai]

Silence is assent.

You don't have to like Kerry.

You don't have to like the man, or his politics, or his stances, or his dress sense. You don't have to like Kerry in order to vote for him, because you aren't voting for a man. You're voting for change.

That is the power that we the people of the United States of America have been given; the power to voice our wish for change.

Vote. Speak. I won't tell you who to vote for, because that's every man's own choice. Never forget that there are and continue to be people out there who have a vested interest in keeping you silent, because if you do not vote, then you surrender your power, your voice to them. There are people who count on public apathy, on low voter turnout, on the people turning a blind eye to the actions of the government because they have been lied to, and led to believe that they are powerless. We are mis-led to believe that nothing we say or do can make a difference, that even if we elect a new president nothing will change, and that is a lie. If we let ourselves believe that lie then they have succeeded in rendering us silent.

Silence is assent.

If you approve of what Bush has done, is doing, will continue to do, then vote for Bush. I'm not going to tell you to vote against your conscience. But if you're dissatisfied; if you're angry, if you're bitter, if you don't like what our country has become, what our people have done, if you don't want this world to stay the way it is, then vote for change. You aren't voting for Kerry the man; you are voting for change.

We do not yet know if John Kerry will be a better president, a better commander-in-chief, a better leader than George Bush. We do not need to know. We're voting to kick Bush out, because we don't like the way our current president is running things. If we don't like the way Kerry runs things, then we'll kick him out and put another man in place. And if we don't like the way he runs things, then we'll do it again. And again. And again, as many times as we need to until our politicians get the message: they need to represent us, their people, their voters. We'll change horses as many times as we have to to get one that isn't lame. That is the right that we as voters have been given.

Silence is assent.

If you don't vote, you are implicitly stating that you approve of the way things are being done. If you don't approve, then act to change things. Silence is assent.

If you don't vote, then you are still making a statement: you are stating that you don't care what happens to the country, that you are all right if things continue. You are saying that you approve of wars waged without cause, of the economy raped, of peoples oppressed, of our future plundered. You are saying that it's fine with you if these things happen, because you don't care enough to change things.

If you don't vote, you forfeit your voice. It doesn't matter if you're a Republican, or a Democrat, or an Independant, or a Green, or a Libertarian; it doesn't matter if you're a liberal, a conservative, a radical, a reactionary, a moderate. It doesn't matter if you're a Harvard intellectual or a blue-collar worker. If you don't vote, you are equally silent.

Silence is assent.

You don't have to donate to John Kerry's campaign. You don't have to put his bumper sticker on your car. You don't have to attend his rallies. You don't have to like the man. You don't have to vote for John Kerry; you vote for change, because voting is your voice.

Silence is assent.

Silence is assent.

Speak.

Comments

[girl-starfish.livejournal.com]

That is the power that we the people of the United States of America have been given; the power to voice our wish for change.

Sorry, Mikke, but I do have to point out that not only are there other countries who use an elective system to chose their leaders, but democracy was in fact invented by non-Americans as well.

I'm sorry to snark, it must be the New Zealander in me. *cuddles* Yay, change!

[oysterverse.livejournal.com]

I do have to point out that not only are there other countries who use an elective system to chose their leaders, but democracy was in fact invented by non-Americans as well.

For what it's worth, the statement does not necessarily imply that there aren't other democratic countries, or that America invented democracy. And since this is reference to the upcoming American presidential election, it's reasonable for her to use language referring specifically to the American electoral system and how that affects citizens.

I know wherefore the snark, but keep in mind that not all Americans are totally ignorant of history and geography.

[girl-starfish.livejournal.com]

I know that the statement can be taken many ways, and I hope Mikke would realise the comment is meant ironically. I'm prone to teasing her, but this doesn't mean I take her intelligence lightly ^_~

[oysterverse.livejournal.com]

Eh, I'm a bit oversensitive, what with all the kerfluffle on fm_alchemist these past few days. I should have known better than to think you really meant it.

[kracken.livejournal.com]

You're voting for the man who will be the most powerful person in the world. I think you should care what that man stands for and what his plans are. You may toss out someone who you consider a demon, and get the devil himself instead if you aren't careful...

[oysterverse.livejournal.com]

I think you should care what that man stands for and what his plans are.

Oh hell, why start now?

[kodalai.livejournal.com]

I chose to refrain from saying in the original post that I hardly thought we could do worse, and though your point is well taken, I don't think it's cognizant to the message. The voting public demonstratably does not care if our politicians dissect kittens as a hobby, and when you get into the realm of public policy, demons and devils are entirely relative.

[oysterverse.livejournal.com]

Nicely put, and I agree with the sentiment. I think you have a bigger flist than me; still, would you mind if I reproduced this on my journal?

[ayelle.livejournal.com]

Beautifully written! I applaud you.

There's a post I've been meaning to write for a long time that kind of complements this one. I'm sure you'll recognize it when/if I eventually write it.

Of course the only thing that's missing from this is that really, we shouldn't be voting Bush out. The criminal dishonesty that's surrounded this administration fully merits impeachment. But, you can't always get what you want...

[(Anonymous)]

Of course, impeachment is merited. The irony is that Reagan was more deserving of impeachment than Nixon (who fully deserved it -- and yes, I know he resigned one step ahead of the sheriff & even managed to negotiate a pardon into the bargain) -- the bipartisan Irangate investigative Congressional committee essentially said that, while forgoing initiating impeachment action mostly because the President himself was clearly well along the road of dementia by 1987. Similarly, Bush is more deserving of impeachment than either of the others -- the lies, deceptions, frauds, the treasonous exposure of a Deep Cover CIA operative, the corrupt cronyism, the ineptness at protecting the country's interests, the alienation of the consciences of the entire world and incitement to rage of the entire billion-strong Islamic world, the betrayal of the world's ecological future for cheap present corporate profits and to placate the pseudo-moralistic Religious Right -- in short, the betrayal of the security of America as well as every ideal it has ever stood for -- these represent far greater high crimes and misdemeanors than Nixon or even Reagan could ever dream of.

But consider: if the present den of thieves and fascists can be stripped of its stranglehold on power, then many of them can and will be held accountable in courts of law. That is why they fight so ruthlessly to hang on to power -- it is the only hope that many of them have to stay out of prison.

GWB