Matt D Posted February 21, 2016 Posted February 21, 2016 Do you like Donald Trump but on principle reject the idea of voting? Perhaps there's a third way...
AccuTron Posted February 22, 2016 Posted February 22, 2016 I couldn't get into the video because of the music. It's got that weepy feel-good sound that makes me feel that any moment I'll be asked to Save The Whales. This type of music is manipulative, and usually elsewhere means deception is taking place, that we are to emote, not think. A valid message doesn't need a choir. 1 1
Matt D Posted March 3, 2016 Author Posted March 3, 2016 I couldn't get into the video because of the music. It's got that weepy feel-good sound that makes me feel that any moment I'll be asked to Save The Whales. This type of music is manipulative, and usually elsewhere means deception is taking place, that we are to emote, not think. A valid message doesn't need a choir. I don't know about manipulative--but it's a different experience. Definitely I didn't get as many views with this one. Maybe that's because of the music or the topic. I rather liked it, but hey, you have to listen to your customers. 1
dsayers Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 Since I maintain the position that political voting is the initiation of the use of force, I wonder if I might offer some push back and spark a debate on the matter? In the video, you said that what a person does in a coercive environment is up to them. I agree that where coercion is present, consent is not. However, I would argue this does not apply to political voting at least in some places in the world. While the system itself is a coercive one, most people are not commanded to vote under threat of violence. As such, political voting is a choice. It's my first time watching one of your videos. I've always been impressed by this genre of youtube video and am curious how you execute it. I liked it a lot. Also, I admire your embracing of criticism as valuable. @AccuTron: I understand what you said and share your opinion in general. I hope you'll revisit the video though. It went in a different direction than I had anticipated. My only issue with the music is that it compete with the narration too much.
Matthew Ed Moran Posted March 3, 2016 Posted March 3, 2016 Planning to check out the video tomorrow. Dsayers I have a hard time seeing voting as the initiation of force, which does not mean you're wrong. But for voting to be the initiation of force, it would seem necessary that the alternative to voting would not lead to the initiation of force. But if it i practically certain that whether you vote or not, the initiation of force will be accomplished by the government, then there can be a consequentialist case made to vote if there is reason to believe it will lead to less initiation of force. I believe this is a terribly hard case to make since beyond really large numbers voting is irrelevant, and since voting will not provide any certainty the person receiving your vote will stay true to their principles. But I do not see how voting can reasonably be considered the initiation of force is the alternative to voting also implies the initiation of force. I am open to counter arguments, but just to be honest this is going to be a steep hill to climb with me if the alternative to voting does indeed imply the initiation of force from any reasonable view of situations where voting is an option. If it can be proven that not voting will have an identifiable effect on the amount of initiation of force in society, then I think you have a case to make Edit: I don't mean to hijack your thread, Matt. Dsayers I would start a thread on this, but before that can you point me towards where you may have argued this before?
Recommended Posts