Concession is Non-Negotiable: Voting is Moral Vandalism by Bill Buppert

“Those who vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything.”
– Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin

“Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.”
– H.L. Mencken

Voting is a primary tool for tyrants, they need the blame shifted from themselves to the willing accomplices in the population for the crimes they’ve committed and those uncommitted up to the time they resume their nefarious tasks of threatening, fining, kidnapping, maiming and killing selected Helots who happen to slide into the sight the government machine has focused on its latest rapine project.

I’ve explained in essays before the nuts and bolts of why voting is a declaration of war on your neighbors, friends and family. If a local gang flying colored rags and singing bad songs came to you and said we’re taking half of your shit and we’ll put a surcharge on your misbehavior if you object, some of the men may go to gun but most Americans would simply roll over, expose their bellies and trickle a small amount of urine on themselves to demonstrate agreement to the idea.

Voting is a failure of moral imagination.

You’ll notice a vote in this country is never about changing the system to one of zero theft and initiated aggression on the part of the state. It’s always about a nest of psychopaths offering a menu of the same violent and economically illiterate voodoo that is government bookkeeping and barbaric behavior on residents and non-residents alike. Clinton is a classic candidate in America in that she is a sanctioned crime family member whose obeisance to the law is more nuanced than the average human and she has a penchant to wage war against anyone opposed to her through both ideas and actual violence.

The Clintons and Busheviks have similar crime family DNA. The Republicans have yet to win the Offal Office without a Bush or Nixon on the ticket since 1952.

2016 has been an especially bad year for the Wizard of Oz in America because the curtain has been pulled back to expose a rotting maximum government dynasty that seems to seamlessly trace its roots back to the Lincolnian Marxist overdrive applied to the Hamiltonian machine. The email revelations on the DNC not only reveal a sclerotic and arthritic grasp on the levers of criminal power but a stupidity that defies imagination when one considers the non-existent security measures taken to protect their internet communications. The alphabet soup of palace intrigue and kindergarten whisper campaigns animated everything from a demonization of the Catholic church to the secret jeremiad against the now compliant Venezuelan Bernie.

Imagine if you will: none of this had come out before the election season, the mass of bleating sheep would be a little more numerous and a small remnant of cognoscenti would have the burden of knowing who the Clintons were without having a leg to stand on in proof. I will tell you that if the same releases had occurred on the RNC, the Democrat’s trustworthy clients among the Republicans would have demonstrated the same intrigue levied against the enemies of Jeb Bush, who is the perfect GOP candidate: a milquetoast government supremacist of middling intellect willing to be the water boy for every expansion of Leviathan that would come across his desk. The Busheviks have always been reliable supporters of every government demolition of individual liberty and pliant apparatchiks for fleecing the tax Helots in every way imaginable.

I’m not an acolyte of the Constitutional framework and the resulting monster unleashed against the victims in North America and the entire planet after 1893 after the aboriginal population had been murdered and reduced to manageable proportions on the continent. You are witnessing the apex accomplishment of the Hamiltonian Constitutional construct.

I’ve discussed the many wonderful qualities of secession in previous posts to include in the last fortnight. The usual suspects even among the vaunted threeper crowd that secession is legal in Texas and nowhere else always amuse me. I’ve given up on Constitutionalists of every stripe who have become nothing more than Menshevik apologists for a ballooning government. Let me set the record straight: with rare historical exceptions (the Czech-Slovak divorce), secession is never within the legal framework of ANY state.

Never.

If you think the BREXIT decision is safe, wait for it. The future portends some interesting wrinkles.

If Texas wants to leave, don’t vote it away. Walk away and cut off all ties. Take a week to secure the borders and establish diplomatic relations with countries abroad first and the American government last.

Yet history is replete with thousands of examples of countries that simply wrested their liberty by force of arms or wholesale refusal to comply with every facet of threats and promises by the losing government. I would daresay that ninety percent of all nation-states in history are born in secession. It wasn’t the US that came to the table in Paris in 1783 to fashion the peace after eight years of war, it was thirteen different nation-states that were formerly fleeced colonies of the Crown in London.

Secession is the natural orchid house for the evolution of new polities and breakaway entities.

Look, nation-states are criminal enterprises dressed up to resemble legitimate storefronts with colored rags blowing in the breeze, bad music crackling on the loudspeaker and splendidly dressed psychopaths singing the odious song of their conquests, promises and future greatness. You’ll note the greatness is usually cloaked in a sacrifice that the violence brokers themselves never dirty themselves with. Your attendance in government schools was nothing more than a finishing process to make sure you as slave people think you’re free.

So what to do with the vote?

I have a suggestion. Never concede a vote.

I know, I know, the fashionable sociopaths coo their soothing words about the peaceful transition of power but what they leave out is there is nothing peaceful about the process. Don’t think so?

Stop obeying, stop complying, stop paying your taxes and refuse the lawful orders of the coproaches.

Yeah, I thought so.

Much of this could have been stopped in its tracks early. Local residents in Philadelphia could have barred the doors of the building the Founding Lawyers were plotting their coup in 1787 and started a bonfire for liberty. Aaron Burr could have shot Alexander Hamilton before the Constitutional ink dried, George Washington’s rather considerable corpse could have had its knees to the breeze decorating a tree at the end of a hemp rope in Pennsylvania during the Whiskey Rebellion and on and on.

But these are acts of violence! No, these are acts of self-defense.

Refusing concession to the fetid results of a government-sponsored plebiscite is an act of self-defense. I know we all hear the empirical rubbish of the implied social contract and other such paranormal nonsense. As Lysander Spooner would say today, I didn’t sign shit. I looked through all my legal paperwork in the house and failed to find any document that proves the government owns me and directs me as they wish that I agreed to.

 So I want to get this straight as a non-voter. I don’t participate in the criminal enterprise known as voting where my neighbor, family and friends (and complete strangers) are my property to dispose of as I wish if I win a majority. I see this as me showing up at your unjust execution and getting to elect which means they employ to dispose of you. That is morally wrong.

Majoritarian tyranny is morally wrong, bereft of virtue by any estimation. The very concept of participating in a contest in which I must abide by the results involuntarily when I don’t even consent to the results is akin to madness.

Barking mad.

As a matter of fact, who in their right mind can contend that voting has made them free? I am all ears for evidence that attends that conclusion.

The fact that the Volstead Act was repealed was an aberration in American history.

As a gun guy, I look at the trail of tears that is Federal weapons legislation since 1934 and scratch my head at any sober Constitutionalist, especially the mentally enfeebled originalists, and wonder how you rationalize your compliance.

But then again, that’s the rub isn’t it? Obedience and fear are the touchstone of all government compliance, the entire received political spectrum has made an art of intellectually connecting the dots on why slavery is preferred much like the Southron apologists for chattel slavery in the 19th century with their elaborate schemes of taking care of untermensch, compassion for the weal minded and the utter lack of imagination to think a group of people could fend for themselves unless under a lash.

A position that eerily resembles the same pseudo-intellectual justifications for tax and regulatory slavery today.

If you vote, don’t complain. You put the leash in your mouth and handed the keys to your cage to a psychopath in a suit. Your clown posse, not mine.

“Be this as it may, they decided by vote which of the books out of the collection they had made, should be the WORD OF GOD, and which should not. They rejected several; they voted others to be doubtful, such as the books called the Apocrypha; and those books which had a majority of votes, were voted to be the word of God. Had they voted otherwise, all the people since calling themselves Christians had believed otherwise; for the belief of the one comes from the vote of the other.”
– Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

Digg thisShare on YummlyShare on TumblrPrint this pageEmail this to someoneShare on FacebookFlattr the authorShare on Google+Share on LinkedInPin on PinterestShare on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on VKBuffer this page

16 thoughts on “Concession is Non-Negotiable: Voting is Moral Vandalism by Bill Buppert

  1. Pingback: Buppert: Voting Is Moral Vandalism | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  2. Can you point to any psychological research about what it takes to be seen as “legitimate”? What’s the minimum number of voters it takes to switch a group from “gang of criminals” to “town council” in the eyes of most of their victims?

  3. With regard to the widespread compliance with overt disarmament … I think it’s a cognitive dissonance thing.

    First thing … most men are cowards.

    Second thing … most men have strong egos, that they need to maintain.

    So, the State says some variant of, “Give me your guns.”
    Every man knows that his choice is either compliance or a physical fight. Each one of you KNOWS this.

    But, he is shit-scared of the results of disobedience. So, how to resolve the issue.

    Easy. He pretends that he actually AGREES with giving up the weapon. This pretence is usually so effective that he, mostly, convinces himself. Mostly.

    He tells his friends, “I don’t like it, but it’s the LAW.” Maybe he says, “It’s sensible, I don’t need that to hunt.” Or, “I’m gonna resist; I’m joining the NRA. We can lobby DC to get this law changed.”

    I don’t know, there’s a thousand excuses out there. All of them are predicated upon the idea that what is happening is somehow legitimate. He HAS to make the Government’s actions sound legitimate, because then, there is no reason to actually fight. And, he doesn’t want to fight … because he’s a coward.

    The few that aren’t cowards … the Bundys and Finicums of this world … are thus left isolated. Hung out to dry. Nobody said, “I’m afeared to help these men.” No, the typical reaction was, “These men are wrong; the Government is right. Therefore, I am absolved of the duty to help them.” Or, maybe, “It’s a trap …” Even as those words were uttered, they knew they were lies. And, they knew that we knew that they were lies.

    Some of you will object to the term “coward”. OK, you can substitute other terms. Subservient, or submissive, perhaps. You can even argue that you’ve been raised to it … a lot of truth in that.

    But, now you’ve read this, you can never again argue that you were ignorant of this concept. If what I have written is making you feel uncomfortable, don’t let your first reaction be to lash out at me. Try a little introspection, first. See whether there is a grain of truth in it.

    It’s difficult to do this; I found it difficult, and painful. But, if you can’t examine your own motives, then you can’t address any problems therein. You remain trapped by your dissonance.

    The men in Govt know how this works. They will actively encourage you to adopt the lies that permit your inaction.

    An analogy. The Falaise Gap. Surround your enemy, BUT leave him the option of retreat. Now, he is not committed to the fight. He can “retreat with dignity”, telling himself that he isn’t “running away”, he is “falling back and re-grouping for a fresh assault.”

    Of course, as he retreats in chaos (rout), you pick him off, one by one.

  4. Pingback: Concession is Non-Negotiable: Voting is Moral Vandalism by Bill Buppert | From the Trenches World Report

  5. In 1857 the Boston scholar, George Ticknor, wrote to an English friend that American politics is “completely inexplicable.”

    Indeed, one reason for this is that some Americans at times will turn a purely political matter into a moral issue. That is to say, they will turn a matter of indifference into a matter of right or wrong. Furthermore, this is not an honest mistake done out of zeal, but is a deliberate deception. In other words, some will turn this matter into a moral issue because they want to be justified in defending it to the death, and to be able to demonize those who would not agree with them.

    So it is with the above article, as it is with many articles that appear on this site. Yet voting is a political matter, not a moral issue.
    Just the same, the reason why this country has gotten into a pronounced, lawless political situation today, not to mention the lawless societal, business, and marital situations, is because America has fallen away from biblical Christianity and the moral transformation of the heart which it brings. As a result we no longer have a moral or religious people in this land, but a people who make up their own morals. Moreover, such people will be prone to make bad political decisions, intentionally or unintentionally, not to mention bad societal, business, and marital decisions.

    Ask yourself: From where did the corrupt heads of government come? They came from the pool of citizens.

    Thus the citizenry, the pool from which those in government, the military, and the police have come, is itself lawless and unethical. “As the people are, so will the government be,” the Latin maxim goes [Ut rex, ita, grex]. Yet the above article fails to consider, to mention, or to address this.

    For instance, a vagabond could steal a ride on a boxcar, while a college graduate could steal the whole railroad. What would be the difference, since their intent would be the same? The difference would be this: their opportunity and their know-how. That is all.

    No? Notice the “Me first!” attitude among the citizenry! For example, see how many citizens willfully and persistently break the clearly posted speed limit! Why? It is because they have no will to be moral. They think that they are above the law.

    All of America has a severe moral problem, not just the notorious citizens in the headlines. In fact, the chief moral problem is America’s willful and stubborn refusal to admit that it has a moral problem.

    Thus things are not going to get any better in government until the citizens morally get better.

    Just the same, the author of this article urges his political solution: No longer vote, but secede (which still would have to be done by political voting, however)!

    Nevertheless, he is addressing merely a political symptom, not the underlying problem itself: to change the corrupt heart to become moral.
    How could this be done? There is only one way.

    It would be called “mission work.” That is to say, fearless preachers such as Jonah, Elijah, and John the Baptist will be needed in America to indict this land of its sordid departure from the Lord, and urge it to return to the Lord in repentance of its sins, and of faith in his gospel promise of pardon. Nothing less will do.

  6. Concerning the quote at the end of this article by Thomas Paine regarding an act of voting on what would be and what would not be the Word of God:

    The action of the Council of Trent (1545-1563), in which the Roman Catholic Church declared by a mere decree what books should comprise the Bible, and also anathematized all those who would refuse to accept all the books contained in the Vulgate as anti-Christian, was a presumptive usurpation of authority. The Bible has given no such authority to any man or to any group of men.

    The collection of biblical books, rather was done in this manner: What we call “the Old Testament” was a collection of sacred writings that were compiled together not by a vote, but simply on account of their obvious divine nature as books which were inspired by the Holy Spirit. What is known as the “Apocrypha” was never included in this collection because of its obvious non-inspired characteristics.

    What we refer to as the “New Testament” writings were compiled in the same way. Indeed, the church of the new testament was not a new church with a new religion, but a continuation of the one true church. To this enduring church the same Spirit of God who had spoken through Moses and the prophets graciously granted a continuation of his inspired Word through a period of about five decades.

    After this the early Christian churches took exacting care to distinguish between the genuine, inspired writings from those simple, pastoral writings ministers, and from spurious writings which had a religious narrative.

    Furthermore, each Christian church claimed the right of satisfying itself in this matter. By the year A.D. 250, the Christian churches commonly had satisfied themselves at to what comprised the New Testament.

    Just the same, today, when an average layman would read an inspired book of the Word of God, the divine, powerful words themselves will impress upon his mind that this book has been divinely written. Any matter written solely by man will not do that.

  7. If you told me, that “I did not have the ability to choose one MASTER, isn’t freedom”, I would tell you, that you are a fool, GOD give me that right and Christians and I choose HIM and HIS SON, JESUS CHRIST!!

  8. Pingback: Rational Review News Digest, 11/07/16 - FBI goes back to pretending Clinton isn't a crook - Thomas L. Knapp - Liberty.me

  9. Voting is consent to be ruled over.

    The problem is most people want masters. They condone slavery, and believe there are masters who should rule, and slaves who should be ruled over. They don’t want to take responsibility and exercise their own authority.

    Voters are adolescents who have not yet grown into adulthood, and want other adults to run their lives for them.

    When are people going to grow up and stop endorsing slavery and mastery over others?

    • When are people going to grow up and stop endorsing slavery and mastery over others?

      Never. Only 1 in 100 humans don’t want a master. If this 1% of freethinkers don’t want to be mastered, they need to work harder at self-defense.

  10. Only one thought. If you vote, then you’re “choosing your master”. If you DON’T vote, then SOMEONE ELSE is “choosing your master”. Anyway, you’re letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

  11. I didn’t sign shit.

    Except my tax form, my application for my license plate, my dog license, my real estate consent to be taxed forever forms, my implied consent to have my bodily fluids involuntarily removed from my for any accusation of a pre-crime.

    All brought upon me by people who voted for me to be a slave, while I’m still trying to get us all to realize one simple axiom.

    I don’t own you….

    And you don’t own me…

    Obviously we will have to work on the second sentence in my simple axiom for years.

    You can all go pick you new plantation owners and handlers with gusto, vote hard, they will reward you with state sanctioned sodomy with the same gusto.

    Explain it to your children, why they will give over fifty percent of their ability to think, create, produce and labor to a system that builds better cages and trains better killers every day with that money.

    I’ll never vote again. It only encourages the psychopathic bastards to continue with their sick plans.

    Fuck You, That’s Why.

    Sean

  12. Governments can not exist without being corrupt.

    Why do so many expect otherwise?

    Every government from the noble(gag) republic to the total dictatorship of North Korea, can not exist without breaking every one of the “Ten Commandments”. People in government make laws that equal or exceed the Creators laws and authority. People in government expect to be worshiped in place of the Creator by calling them Honorable or standing when an old man in a black dress walks into a room. People in government have taken authority away from parents and claim the children as their own property.. It is wrong to steal or kill except when it is done on the arbitrary order of people in government. People in government covet the property of everyone and make arbitrary rules to take it.

    I have posted similar remarks about the government and Tuesdays worship event and I am called crazy. It has been a long awakening process and I can not see the human race as a whole anything but collectively insane.

Let us know what you think...