Apathy will only Make Things Worse (Focus on Gradual Change Instead)

Apathy won't Solve the System

It’s coming.

Voting season that is.

The presidential election is fast approaching, candidates are throwing their hats into the ring, and the typical presidential banter is starting up.

The hashtags are out and about, mocking candidates in every conceivable way.

The pessimists are out too. And man, are they at full strength.

It’s the same every election cycle, but it never seems to get old

What’s sad is that it comes from people who want to change the system the most.

These pessimists have the right motives at heart, but they’re going about it all wrong.

You can’t bring about change through apathy, trust me. It doesn’t work with my school work, and it doesn’t work with governments.

Ideas like refusing to vote, the lesser of two evils, and not supporting a candidate are misguided.

They’re especially misguided if you want to change the system.

If you hold any of those beliefs, you’re probably not happy with me for saying that.

I’m “a statist” for saying that.

Nice come back.


But seriously, why do you think I said that? Do I just dislike the type of people that say those things? Do I have ulterior motives? Am I one of those “if you don’t vote, you can’t complain” people?

The answer is no. Frankly, I love those type of people. Many of my friends are “those people.”

The reason for why I don’t appreciate such views is because they’re counter-productive.

Whenever you say “don’t vote” to someone, you’re encouraging apathy. You’re encouraging indifference toward the system. But guess what, we already have apathy toward the system.

In fact, it’s what got us into this situation.

Apathy toward the system means less accountability. It means less barriers to crooked individuals getting (and staying) in power. It means a less informed populace. It means the system is more prone to errors and corruption.

The more apathy you have, the more the government becomes a tool of the few, instead of the many.

The typical argument for this state of voter apathy is that it’ll take away power from the government.

The thought is if you don’t participate in the system the system can’t control you.

But that’s exactly where the argument breaks down.

Refusing to vote, and participate in the government in general does not loosen their control on you. You still live on “their land.” You’re still punished for not obeying laws. The police can still arrest you. The NSA can still spy on you.

Your denial to “participate” does nothing.

At the most, it communicates to your politician that you’re sick and tired of how things have been run.

At the least, you’re a number on a voter turnout chart.

Congratulations, you’ve accomplished a lot.

And here’s the problem with this strategy.

It affects you more than it affects them.

If you don’t participate in the system you make politicians in power happy. That’s one less informed citizen they have to worry about.

If a hundred of you don’t participate, that’s less liberty loving informed voters the establishment has to worry about.

The bigger the number of apathetic voters is, the easier it is for sleazy politicians to stay in office.

apathy only helps those in power

The system won’t collapse by apathy alone. If you want to collapse the system then you should read up on some hardcore anarchist literature. Maybe take a page or two from the Bolshevik revolution.

There’s only two options to changing the system…

You can either go the violent revolutionary way.

Or, you can go the gradual change method.

You know what the first option entails. It’s bloody, messy, and has the potential to blow up horribly.

The second option is less known, but historically more effective.

It’s the slow gradual change method.

What’s with the “slow” part? Kind of a turnoff isn’t it?

Think along the lines of realistic goals. Change is rarely takes place quickly. It’s rarely a two week even. It rarely happens in the span of one presidency.

Even violent uprisings were the product of several years (or decades) of change.

Realizing that change comes gradually will keep your efforts in perspective.

Affecting the system and influencing it is more effective than simply walking away from it.

However you decide to deal with the problem of an oversized government, action needs to be taken.

Ranting at people for voting isn’t the answer. Encouraging them to ditch the system isn’t the answer.

I’m not here to say that your views are wrong. I’m just saying that your strategy needs to change.

Voting alone won’t promote individual liberty. Duh.

But ditching it won’t help either.

It’s got to be a combination of voting, campaigning, outreach, evangelism, and education.

That’s how you do it.

Change is never a quick five step process. It takes time, energy, and resources.

If you want to learn how to effect change in your family, neighbors, and community, sign up for The Informers. I’ll show you how to create arguments that resonate with your audience and evangelize personal liberty.
Did you like this article? If so please take a moment to support future work of mine on Patreon!
About John-Pierre Maeli

Keeping it simple and crystal clear, because anything else is useless. I'm here to not only inform you, but to also connect with you. That's what The Political Informer is all about. Feel free to follow me on either Twitter or Google+ Let's talk!

Learn How to...

Just enter your email to get started (plus free goodies afterward)