An interview with Election Boycott Activists Mark E. Smith and Terri Lee of the Boycott Election 2012 campaign.
This interview was conducted in September and October 2012, via email, by Joe Ramsey. The responses below were co-authored by Terri Lee and Mark E. Smith.
Joe Ramsey: Do you think that it’s correct to describe the U.S. as a “democracy” in 2012? How so or how not?
The definition of a democracy is a form of government where supreme power is vested in the hands of the people. In such a government, the final say on everything, including fiscal and foreign policy issues would be up to the people to decide by a direct vote.
Obviously we don’t have that kind of government, in fact both the Bush and Obama administrations were explicitly clear that they would not allow public opinion to influence policy decisions, so rather than having the final say, as we would if we the people had supreme power over government, we have no say at all. A republic is also a democratic form of government, but in a republic the people exercise their supreme power over government through their elected representatives rather than directly. But in order to exercise power over our elected representatives, we’d have to be able to hold them accountable and we can’t.
The best we can do is ask them to hold themselves accountable, and they don’t seem to want to do that–in fact they tend to grant themselves immunity and/or pardon themselves even for flagrant Constitutional violations and war crimes.
JR: What exactly are you calling for? And what’s your motive for doing so?
We’re calling for a boycott of the 2012 election. The reason for this is that only a major party candidate has any chance of winning, and both major parties are dependent upon big corporations to fund their election campaigns, so both would represent Wall Street rather than Main Street. We already know that however people vote, the election will result in more trillions spent on foreign wars while domestic needs go unmet, and more bailouts for banks that deserved to fail due to their irresponsible investment schemes. When you know the results of an election beforehand, it isn’t really an election and doesn’t deserve the consent of the governed.
JR: Why do you believe that people should boycott the Presidential election?
There are many reasons. Back in Bush v. Gore 2000, the Supreme Court said that there is no Constitutional requirement that the popular vote be counted. If they don’t have to count the votes, we don’t have to cast them. Most voters don’t think that our government has been doing a good job. Retaining or even promoting employees who don’t do their job is a sure way to lose your business, unless, of course, you have a corrupt government to bail you out. Our government only bails out the rich, so only the 1% should vote for it.
JR: What has been the response to this boycott call so far?
The response has been mixed! Some naturally gravitated to the Election boycott as they had already been quietly boycotting presidential elections for years. Others are attached to elections and hold on to the illusion that it has something to offer. For others still, there was lack of clarity about the Election Boycott.
Our first task was to clear up some misunderstanding about the 2012 Election Boycott.
Some think that the Call to Boycott 2012 is a ‘call for apathy’ and ask “How can you make a difference by not participating?” They view the boycott as lazy and irresponsible ‘inaction’ and view voting as ‘participatory’. In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. Those ideas are completely reversed: The Election Boycott is a call for Direct Action and requires much more effort, coordination and effort than the simple “two minutes it takes to pull the lever” (Howard Zinn) required to vote.
Some say: “Boycott the Two Parties!” or “Boycott the Corporate Candidates!”. This, of course, is code for ‘vote third party’ which is what the left has been accustomed to doing year after year with no results to show for it. The alternative party presidential candidates and the voter both know — in advance and with absolute certainty — that third party candidates have absolutely no chance whatsoever of sitting in the Oval Office. Ever. And yet the left circles around them agonizing as to which non-viable third party candidate to choose from.
JR: Who else is involved in the campaign?
Mark and I are working closely with Boycott author and speaker, Linh Dinh as well as the blog owner of Proletarian Center for Research, Education and Culture
The Proletarian Center has officially endorsed the Boycott 2012 campaign.
Author, syndicated columnist, cartoonist and Election Boycotter Ted Rall has provided several ‘boycott cartoons’ for the Election Boycott campaign.
Mark and I have been the radio guests of Bob Carson of Carson’s Corner, Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox Radio, and Dave Fletcher’s Public Reality Radio Show.
A great audio for Election Boycott Skeptics can be found here: The Election Boycott show on Bob Carson’s radio program, “Carson’s Corner”.
JR: What would it mean to succeed in a campaign like this? What do you think that this campaign can accomplish? What has it accomplished so far?
Success would be a clear demonstration by means of a historically low turnout, indicating that most people do not feel this government represents them.
JR: Is the goal to delegitimize the existing so-called “democratic” system? What kind of change would you like to see in our current political situation?
People often say that others fought and died for our right to vote.
That’s not exactly correct. What people fought and died for was a voice in government. What we’d like to see is a democratic form of government where power was vested in the hands of the people.
Uncounted, mostly unverifiable votes, for candidates who don’t let public opinion influence their policy decisions and who can’t be held accountable while in office (which is the only time they’re supposed to represent their constituents), are not a voice in government.
JR: Do you conceive of your efforts as an attempt at pressuring for reform, or more as laying the basis for a more revolutionary movement? Do you think that the US political system can be reformed, or will it have to be overthrown? How can a boycott of elections contribute to a more radical political shift?
The boycott is a revolutionary rather than a reformist movement. We don’t want government to grant a few privileges here and there–a more benign tyranny so to speak–we want government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
JR: Is it simply the limited offerings or bad policies of the two major parties that you object to, or is it something deeper that is at issue here? What do you see as the fundamental nature of the problem we face?
The problem we face is that no matter who is in power, the US is only has two major growth industries, the military-industrial complex and the prison industrial complex–killing people and caging people.
Derivatives and other fraudulent fiscal schemes always crash, so we need a sustainable economy that isn’t based on killing people or caging people but on making the world a better place for people to live in. If we can get to the moon and send a surveyor to Mars, I think we could manage something that easy. Other countries have and we’re not really less intelligent or less competent.
JR: According to recent polls, very significant numbers of Americans are not planning to vote in the upcoming election. This includes an even greater percentage of young voters. Why is that?
When you have lackluster candidates and nothing to gain from voting, it makes sense not to vote. Even without the election boycott movement
2012 is likely be a historically low turnout for a presidential election. We certainly don’t need more parties–I think that what young people are saying is that the party’s over and that they’d like to go to work so that they can have a decent life.
JR: Do you see the Democrats as “the lesser evil”? How so or how not?
Let’s say you have the Devil himself, Satan, running for President on the Republican ticket. The Democrats nominate a little demon from Hell, who is obviously a much lesser evil than Satan. Unless you look a little closer and understand that the demon takes his orders from his boss, who happens to be Satan. So there is no lesser evil. When corporations spend billions of dollars funding the election campaigns of both major parties, they consider it an investment and they know they’ll get trillions back in government contracts and bailouts no matter who wins. Corporations aren’t exactly known for their philanthropy, they have a bottom line to consider and a fiduciary duty to their shareholders.
Why would they spend billions of dollars funding the campaigns of candidates who will only have about a $400k salary once in office?
With Citizens United, they can spend as much as they want. But supposing they spent billions of dollars getting out the vote for the major parties and nobody voted–do you think their boards of directors would let them do it again?
************************************************************************************************************************************
The Official Website of the Call to Boycott the 2012 Election: www.electionboycott2012.org
Mark E. Smith’s blog, Fubar and Grill
Mark’s blog post “You’ve Got to Stop Voting!” has escalated from 1,000 views to over 15,000+ hits over the past month! and his most recent blog, “Jill Stein: Lesser Evil” is quite provocative!



38 Comments

I think a boycott is a lousy idea because the result is indistinguishable from apathy. Politicians interpret non votes as satisfaction with the job they’re doing. The only votes that count are the ones that are cast.
Voting third party or even for Mickey Mouse actually sends a message.
I think that that election boycott is a fabulous idea because it rejects the entire fraudulent system and is the only option that works to delegitimize the government and discredit Rulers. The system will interpret a low voter turnout as a vote of no confident. “Voter apathy” is a type of organic, natural expression of a boycott — but truly apathy is the enemy of the boycott. we’re not apathetic — we’re outraged!
Votes are not tabulated according to how they are cast.
You know who you voted for and you know who won — but what happened between the casting of your vote and the announced winner is anyone’s guess.
Voting Third Party and writing in someone’s name is readily dismissed by the system.
BOYCOTT 2012 grows stronger each day!
Election Boycott won by a landslide in Europe: Just 42% voted. But the people counting the votes still act as if they have the consent of the governed.
Per google search: 41% of eligible voters actually cast ballots in 2010.
Message to politicians?
Thus demonstrating the absurdity and futility of the boycott idea. Even if only 1% showed up to vote, the winners would declare a mandate and the self disenfranchised would be left to bitch and moan that the 1% “betrayed” them or whatever. Can anybody offer me any historical evidence that a boycott of the vote alone actually worked in bringing about change? Because the fact of the matter is, comfortable, well fed people don’t start revolutions. And until people are desperate and hopeless enough to put their lives on the line in order to force change, this is nothing but a futile and meaningless gesture. The politicians want a lower turnout because few people are easier to manipulate than many people and the only “message” they will get is that their tactics are working.
15,000! Wow! Congratulations! That’s almost 0.005% of the population! This movement is really gathering momentum!
Actually, it’s now up to 18,000+ it leaped rapidly. I’m sorry about your reading skills, perhaps you can get a tutor.
It is saying that 15,000 (now up to 18,000) read the article.
More to the point, at least 95 million are election boycotters — and each year the president ‘wins’ by about 17% of the population and the number of non-voters always outnumbers the number that voted for the fake president.
I guess most of you must work for the Ruling Elite judging by the way you are so keen to defend their illusionary contraption to protec their rule.
You’re right: So far the evidence seems to show that boycotting Elections makes those elected Less responsive, not more.
Oh good! Terri’s thumbs still work!
Just wondering about a little thing…
Are you lying about elections now because you somehow didn’t do so good in a NJ Election in your LeftForum Bio you put up for their conference in March this year?
[emphases added]
Or you’ve just always hated elections? Is it because so many boycotted yours? And aren’t elections central to, you know, Union organizing, and kinda democratic?
The only way a voting boycott could send an unambiguous message is if it were paired to a massive show of street level political will. Otherwise it’s just a blank slate for anyone to read anything into they wish. The idea has a 90M or so headstart and still doesn’t register except in passing– adding even 10-20M more would hardly matter. And it’s not a bandwagon 20M people are likely to jump on.
I do have some sympathy for the underlying motivations, but in the end here and now it’s just a stupid idea.
Boom! Terri goes up in a blaze of bitter failure.
Well played, Kelly.
Makes total sense … if you don’t think about it.
If one judges the election boycott movement based on it’s own criteria it totally fails. If we accept the premise that this is indeed “Direct Action” – even before taking the action of boycott, one knows that the outcome is going to be the same.
What does a juvenile Anon-style Doxing prove? Seems like a pretty lame way to try and win a debate. In this case, it’s especially lame because the hook appears to rely almost entirely on dropping the all-important qualifier “presidential” from the boycott campaign and using that to construct a straw-man that the author is saying she “just hates elections.” Then, for a coup de grâce, rounds it out by drawing a false equivalence between presidential politics and the author standing in a local contest to claim this proves she doesn’t actually hold the opinion being voiced but instead should be dismissed as a lying, bitter, failed wannabe politician simply nursing a grudge.
The strung-together fallacies required to generate that construct were dizzying. Booom indeed! Seriously dude, are all Democrats total pussies?
And for the record – the reason the labor movement has been such a dismal failure to America’s workers for well over a decade is because elections have become
central toa proxy for, you know, actual Union organizing.Sure, an election boycott is a terrible idea – the arguments in favor seem only surpassed in comic absurdity by your own tag-team contributions in opposition to the idea. Maybe one bright spot is that perhaps this is an example of labor leaders starting to get a clue. The sooner unions cut the Democratic party loose and start fighting for workers again the better.
My biggest problem with your campaign is that the Presidential election is not the only thing happening this November.
Take my neck of the woods for example. Here, we’re busting chops on the Vote No on Propositions 1, 2, 3 campaign. I realize nobody gives a shit because we’re Idaho, but there really is a chance we can win for our kids where the people of Wisconsin failed. The campaign in my area has been almost pitch-perfect; hitting great notes for the demographics and blanketing local media – with very little push-back. Nobody wants to get caught supporting the “Luna Laws” around here … politicians almost seem sheepishly hoping for a do-over. But in the end it really is going to come down to turnout.
It just seems to me that many of the people are being targeted as likely to join in your boycott – potential Stein and Anderson voters in particular – could be crucial to success of this campaign. And mine can not be the only state that is facing ballot issues of equal importance.
If we’re looking at elections in terms of these issues, I don’t see how anyone can say voting doesn’t matter. My biggest concern is that by placing so much focus on boycotting the presidential race that this campaign functionally becomes equivalent to a campaign for boycotting the other stuff too. It makes little sense to cede the entire battlefield simply because the odds are horribly stacked in some of the specific contests.
When you’re busy encouraging “not voting for president” …. any chance you could be a bit more aggressive working in a plug or two for folks still coming out and voting on the other stuff?
People often say that others fought and died for our right to vote.
That’s not exactly correct. What people fought and died for was a voice in government. What we’d like to see is a democratic form of government where power was vested in the hands of the people.
Uh speaking as a former military member, I find this statement insulting. My vote is part of that “voice in government.” While a vote is not the be all or end all of political action and the country would do much better if people acted like they only had to participate every 2-4 years, it is part of a democratic process. Should there be more choices? Absolutely. As far as I’m concerned there should never be a situation where people feel like they have to choose between the “lesser of evils”. That being said I fail to see how choosing to not participate leads to more choices or better representation. Instead what it appears to say is, “go ahead and choose for me.” The idea that the Board of Directors care whether or not you show up is somewhat laughable. Elections are an opportunity to launder money and pay off players like the media. They could care less whether or not you show up. The fact that millions don’t show up each cycle and every election season you have a three ring circus bigger than the last is proof of that. I fail to see a logical argument for a boycott. It seems smarter to write someone in or choose someone you do agree with. *shrugs*
Who is “The Boston Occupier?” Is it the author of this post?
Heh. In Mark’s ‘Jill Stein: Lesser Evil’ (interesting that Terri didn’t link to the version of that he posted here, by the by; it was quite well-attended), I mentioned the various ballot initiatives both in CO and CA that were pretty damned crucial, given they could set the tone nationally on some issues. CA, among other biggies, will vote on GMO labeling, and in CO we have a chance to legalize marijuana, tax it it, grow industrial hemp, etc. Big deals, as is yours in ID.
Mark (and I have to paraphrase since I can’t grab his Stein post), announced that if I chose to vote ( do), I would be voting for OBomba to assassinate more brown people by drone. Irrefutable logic.
The last time you posted, you quoted but did not source, Ted Rall. The quote (apparently from Facebook), while technically accurate on its face was “somewhat devoid of context” and did not reflect his full view on the subject. I learned this when I asked Ted Rall. In other words, your previous post contained a partial quote out of or devoid of context that did not reflect the author’s full view and I believe it was deceptive and meant to be deceptive.
So again, who is “The Boston Occupier?”
The email exchange is here:
Ted Rall [personal email address redacted for privacy purposes]
Sep 24
to me
Hi Rachel!
Thanks for the heads up. The quote, though somewhat devoid of context, was part of a comment I posted on Facebook.
It’s accurate, though not really my fu (sic) view on the subject.
Best,
Ted
On Sep 21, 2012, at 8:10 PM, Rachel Leatherman wrote:
> From: Rachel Leatherman
> Subject: RachelLeatherman@gmail.com
>
> Message Body:
> Ted,
>
> I post at SmirkingChimp and at Firedoglake under MyFDL in the reader diaries as Crane-Station. My husband (Mason) and I both enjoy your contributions.
>
> Today I came across an article that mentioned you in the introduction. I am concerned about a quote that was attributed to you but not cited to any source at all. In fact, the quote served as the introduction to the post. I am not a moderator or editor, nor am I a paid blogger. I came across this and I was wondering if you could alleviate my concern, nothing more. I believe that when an author is quoted there should be a citation.
>
> Here is the link and following the link is the quote. The post is at Firedoglake/MyFDL in the reader diaries.
>
> The link:
>
> http://my.firedoglake.com/terridi/2012/09/20/election-boycotts-are-popular-worldwide-and-now-in-the-us-too/
>
> The quote (copied and pasted):
>
> By: Terri Thursday September 20, 2012 11:35 pm
>
> Tweet
> INTRO BY ELECTION DISSENTER TED RALL:
>
>
>
> “Voter boycotts have a long and honorable tradition in other countries. Don’t believe the hype—they really care if we don’t vote. Why do you think tyrants like Saddam held regular elections? They were the only candidate on the ballot, but th ey craved electoral legitimacy. Same thing here. Imagine if only 5% of Americans voted. It would send the message that we disapprove of our government. If only 5% voted, 9/11 might never have happened because Al Qaeda could never have argued that we agreed with US foreign policy. The UN would view us for what we are, the oppressed citizens of an authoritarian police state. Most importantly, it would create the space for a new political movement—space currently being taken up by the duopoly.
>
> Let them bomb innocent Pakistanis without my endorsement.”
>
>
> Thank you.
> Sincerely,
> Rachel Leatherman (aka Crane-Station)
Terri, Thanks for providing a few laughs along with my morning coffee. And congratulations on getting 18 k page hits instead of 15 k. Wow! I’ll bet you’re not at 0.005% of the population; that’s probably 0.005001%. you boycott folks are definitely a force to be reckoned with. Oh, and by the way, page hits do not equal support. People watched the Jerry Springer show to laugh at the participants, not to get advice. Myself, personally, I thought laughing at the poor souls on Jerry Springer was a bit cruel. But laughing at you guys, on the other hand, is great fun. You and Mark E. Smith are the Jerry Springer of politics. By the way, if anyone missed it, please read Mark’s most recent FDL post, “Jill Stein: Lesser Evil.”
Also, now I know why your FDL profile is blank. You might have to include, failed Green Party candidate for State Senate in New Jersey. With the reasoning skills exhibited in the sentence below, copied from the above diary, I can’t imagine why the people of New Jersey didn’t make you a state senator.
“I guess most of you must work for the Ruling Elite judging by the way you are so keen to defend their illusionary contraption to protec [sic] their rule.”
And almost none of those are people committing to your idiotic boycott movement. They’re the people who are just too lazy to get out and vote, or just don’t care. Very few of them say “By golly, I’m going to send a message and not vote!”.
Isn’t there somewhere else you can peddle this moronic nonsense?
Well, at least we know now that she’s not a Republican operative.. she’s just a moron..
That comment supplemented my previous one and was meant for the author.
So you care! Wow. Does saying you care really show that?
If you care so much, can you tell me how your vote is counted?
That actually matters more than the act (what a great word) of touching an icon on a machine with software owned, certified, protected and tabulated by contractors and then getting a red, white and blue sticker for your shirt.
Let me answer the question for you since you’ll most likely ignore it anyway. No, you can’t. We’re not allowed to know how the black box works, and that is what makes it a black box.
The truth is that the number of people who care is miniscule, and you’re not among them if you don’t give a damn that the likes of Diebold, ESS, CACI, Wyle and Scytl etc. etc. are counting your vote and you just go along with the charade.
“You’re so stupid for not voting! Here watch me give mine to a defense contractor.”
… so many geniuses, so much ignorance/piety.
When Jimmy Carter’s election verification methods give U.S. elections a big F(ail), I don’t see the point. Exit polls not = to election results and people don’t seem to care. Don’t tell me about “caring” vs. “not caring” (that ones not addressed to you hotdog, I heartily agree with what you wrote)
It’s quite sad to watch how desperately Amerikans cling to the illusion that we have a functioning Democracy. All of the other illusions about our society, rule of law, economic stability and freedom have been shattered so people cling like drowning sailors to the remaining debris like it was the Golden Princess cruise ship.
It may be impossible for many people to deny this final illusion because without that illusion we are truely adrift and must realize that no elected Saviour or Leader will guide us to safety.
Yeah, well, I choose not to be paranoid about every facet of life. The black helicopters aren’t flying over my head, the men in black aren’t coming to get me, and the thought that the entire election is a foregone conclusion is delusional.
If that’s the case, why was there a recount in Florida in 2000? Why was Kerry pressing for a recount in Ohio before he gave up? Did the shadowy figures behind the scenes make a mistake and give too many votes to Bushy, or too many to Gore and Kerry?
You’d think if they were really controlling things, they would have made the 2008 election much closer to keep people involved longer, to maintain that illusion of participation that you purport.
Hey, why do the members of FDL spend so much time on GOTV activities? Are they just wasting their time, if its all rigged in advance?
I’m sorry.. the whole scenario of the elections being pre-manipulated is just batshit crazy, and you really should find something better to obsess over.
hot dog and wayoutwest @ 24 & 26 pretty much nailed it.
Computerized voting results are controlled by a few private corporations via proprietary software. There is no transparent verification mechanism, independent supervisory system, or certifiable accountability whatsoever. Not one voter will ever know for sure who won any given race or referendum or initiative. Thousands or millions of votes can be flipped in total secrecy, with one keystroke, by a single anonymous programmer. It’s been done before.
The cruise-missile pwoggies will continue to gnash their teeth and insult boycott activists and pretend that casting faith-based ballots in a hackable election actually means something. And I’m sure the rest of us have pretty much figured out why.
ROTFLMAO! Bitter about the Green Party shunning her after failing as a candidate so now she’ll show them who’s boss! How funny! And Terri’s remaining credibility goes glub, glub, glub…
Apparently not I’m sorry to say.
You’ve got it backwards tyrellj, voters are pre-manipulated and the votes are manipulated after they are cast. SCOTUS stopped the recount in 2000 and declared that we don’t have a right to see our votes counted.
You seem to believe that our system is honest and our Leaders would never lie to us, good luck with that moronic nonsense.
Three Cheers to Ted Rall who was among the FIRST of the Election Boycotters! He called for an Election Boycott wayyyyyyyyyy ahead of the rest of us, back in August of 2011!
From his website, this:
‹ Previous
Next ›
SYNDICATED COLUMN: Boycott the 2012 Election
August 2nd, 2011
Hey Liberals! Time to Stop Getting Rolled
We might as well have defaulted.
Regardless of where you stand politically, the deal to raise the federal debt limit came too late for the U.S. to achieve its main objective, avoiding the downgrading of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury that would have followed a default.
“The political and financial world surely thinks less of us now, and one demonstration of that will likely be a downgrading of the credit rating of the U.S., probably imposed in the next few months,” writes John Keefe of CBS’s Moneywatch. “The net result will be higher interest rates on U.S. government debt, which is likely to bleed through ultimately to higher costs for all sorts of other interest rates.”
The buzz on Wall Street says that Standard & Poor’s will soon downgrade T-Notes from a sterling “AAA” either to “AA+” or “AA”, the same as Slovakia. That’s exactly what would have happened had there been a default.
It is true: Our leaders are idiots.
“I have a home in Nevada that I haven’t seen in months,” said Majority Leader Harry Reid on the floor of the Senate. “My pomegranate trees are, I’m told, blossoming.” Too bad. He missed his pretty flowers for nothing.
Liberals got rolled.
Just like on healthcare.
Just like on everything else.
Edited by Moderator to comply with Fair Use
(Ted Rall is the author of “The Anti-American Manifesto.” His website is tedrall.com.)
COPYRIGHT 2011 TED RALL
http://www.rall.com/rallblog/2011/08/02/syndicated-column-boycott-the-2012-election
________________
Many did not take his advice and so they’re getting rolled.
Thanks, Ted!
Terri, what part of this:
did you miss?
Do you realize how inappropriate and rude (not to mention illegal) it is to cut and paste an entire text of someone’s work without permission?
You know what? I’ll just email Ted himself and ask him.
Ted illustrated Greg Palast’s book “Billionaires and Bandits – How To Steal An Election In 9 Easy Steps.”
Plus with the art on this PDF, “7 Ways To Beat The Ballot Bandits” which is you know, recent, like now kinda recent, seems like Ted ain’t exactly in Terri’s court.
Kelly, thanks for letting us know that Terri is a former Green party candidate. I have been rolling on the floor, laughing my ass off.
X 2
Terri, I have been rolling on the floor laughing my ass off ever since I heard you are a failed Green party candidate. And I am not surprised that you once again avoid discussion, this time by lifting Ted Rall’s column. You might want to pay attention to that copyright thing. And oh yes, when the Dems and Repugs fail folks, there is an alternative. Vote for a third party. The Greens have really good candidates for president and vice-president.
Just flagged #32 for violating FDL rules.