[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Re: poumons & politics (with no connection to sloan whatsoever)

nice discussion going on here. feeling that i just don't know english 
well enough to fully participate i still would like to comment on this 
thing "apoliticism". 

because, i too believe that "apoliticism" is indeed is "a political 
stance". there is a cause behind not being "political" by, for example, 
not voting at an election. it doesn't matter if it's because you are too 
lazy to get out of bed or you just don't want to vote because you don't 
agree with what you are to vote for. it can be a yes/no referendum or a 
ordinary political election of some sort. if you do not vote you are just 
a part of the "notvoters" no matter if you know everything there's to 
know about politics or don't care at all.

the problem is that the politicians (sp?) of today don't look for a 
reason why peope do not vote. because, to me, by not voting you are 
making a statement just as big as you are when you are voting. no matter 
why you don't vote, there's a reason behind it, and as long as people 
keep being "apolitical" the politicians should take not and ask 
themselves "why do X percent of the population not vote?". the problem of 
people staying in bed instead of voting can be taken care of by letting 
people to simply vote "blank". if you actually did get out of bed to vote 
and then voted "blank" the politicians should really take note. you 
voted, but didn't vote for any of the parties/persons that was available.
to me, it's like a "no" vote to the whole system or, at least, the 
political parties involved in the election (ie. running the country). 

apologies to all americans feeling offended, but this is such a obvious 
problem with the united states. i've understood that to become the 
president of the most powerful country in the world all you need is to do 
is to get slighty more than 20 percent of the population to go out and vote 
for you! this is the case because only about 40% of the total 
american population vote and therefore, to reach majourity (sp?) all you 
need is to get 21% of the pop. to actually place their votes for you!! 

when i first heard about this (and it was from an american) i felt 
frightened. the president-candidates probably want it to be this way, 
because it's a lot more easy to get 21% of the pop. vote for you instead 
of 51%..! it's just sickening and i, and some of my friends, are debating 
this whether the word "democracy" works here or not.

but. what do i know about this anyway. i am sitting on the other side of 
the atlantic and i am sure you all must know a lot more about this than i 
do. maybe i am just stating the obvious or simply talking shit. what i 
know though is that this post is far, far off from the discussion on 
sloan and the ec scene. what i wanted to do was to say that by being 
"apolitical" doesn't mean you don't care. instead you might want a change, 
but it's not like the people in power are going to realize that you don't 
want them and fire themselves. maybe one should become active "apolitcal"?

i believe democracy is in great need of an update. it has been the way it 
is for far too long and there is no room for not wanting what is offered.

it's almost like before nirvana.


On Thu, 29 Feb 1996, C. Trowbridge wrote:

> > po[Asting a reply.  let me just say that i agree
> > totally with your main point:  "apoliticism" is
> > itself a political stance.  well said.  damn it,
> yeah, well said. The only problem is...people who want to fuck you over 
> like Harris and Bouchard and Manning live in a political world and - 
> guess what! - they run this country, so while "apoliticism" may be a cute 
> turn of phrase at a twentysomething cocktail party all it ultimately does 
> is reinforce their power. c'mon...do you really live in such a 
> college'n'rock-addled world that you can convince yourself that 
> "apoliticism is politicism"? yeah, right, and up is down & black is 
> white... sounds like you're getting ready for Big Brother to me. You're 
> basing your world-view on (washed-up) film director Richard Linklater's 
> throw-away line "To draw away in disgust is not the same as apathy", but 
> I think you'll find that when the whip comes down, no cute cynicism is 
> gonna save your ass. I predict a quick politicization. 
> 					love,
> 					Chris>