Proximo, Proxy and Praxeologyby
Benjamin Marks
In the month ahead there will be federal elections in both Australia and the United States. Many articles on LRC and other places have talked about whether it is worthwhile to vote. For Australian readers this is irrelevant, since we are forced to vote. (I’m not voting; they think I’m too young. Anyhow, that’s a different story.) It is about time we discuss the logic of the elections themselves. After all, if elections don’t make sense, then what is nowadays called democracy is invalidated.1 There are several grave logical impasses in the electoral process, and surely, just one is enough to destroy any shred of legitimacy. For those who profess to apologise for elections, you must refute each of the following. Good luck! Firstly, what legal theory justifies a process where participants are, as Lysander Spooner documented in 1870, in voting all anonymous and therefore secret?2 Or, secondly, a system where the majority rules the minority? As Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn put it, fifty-one percent of the voters can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic.3 Anyone with half a brain can surely work out that only through a gobbledygook legal theory, whereby the arbitrary whim of government pretends to legitimate itself, can voting make any sense. Thirdly, as Jean Jacques Rousseau published in 1762, it is impossible for anyone to represent you. Each individual’s will is different and can change. The only legitimate representative concept is that of a commissioner, following directives.4 Fourthly, as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard have expressed, if government thinks that its subjects are too stupid to decide things for themselves, which they obviously do, since we are forced to pay taxes whether we like it or not, for "our own good." Then, on what consistent basis does government allow these same people to vote for it? How can it be that slaves elect their masters?5 Fifthly, if government thinks "its" subjects should elect them, then surely this is best carried out on the free market.6 Sixthly, if we need to appoint a government because citizens can’t look after themselves, then government must be made up of different people to "its" citizens. But, as H.L. Mencken pointed out, government is a gang of men exactly like you and me.7 Seventhly, why in the world, if voters are meant to be communicating their preferences, is there no opportunity to vote government out? Why, if the majority donkey-vote does the donkey not get in? And lastly, to end our analysis, for what God forsaken reason are Australians forced to vote? Can it be for any other reason than, as Lew Rockwell said, voting totals are a way of browbeating people into granting consent?8 To the newly enlightened reader, the insights of this article will be consequential. It should suffice to say, in agreement with Ambrose Bierce, that elections are a kind of advance auction sale of stolen goods.9 Therefore, to echo John Zube, we should be hanging politicians rather than their posters up on trees.10
October 6, 2004 Benjamin Marks [send him mail] lives under the custodian ownership of his parents in Sydney, Australia. He is the generous recipient of occasional research and welfare grants from them. |