Comments on: Whatever

Whatever

netbros — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 04:47:06 -0800

Join the Apathy Party 08 campaign and make sure that nobody decides or makes a difference, because we couldn't care less. Americans everywhere will make their voices heard and their voices will say, "Whatever."

By: Rykey

Rykey — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 04:58:57 -0800

These guys are OK, but I think I'll save my vote for the Outraged Party.

By: armage

armage — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 04:59:20 -0800

Meh, joining stuff is overrated.

By: ColdChef

ColdChef — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:02:05 -0800

What's the difference between ignorance and apathy? I don't know and I don't care.

By: Smart Dalek

Smart Dalek — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:09:14 -0800

tl;dr

By: Cat Pie Hurts

Cat Pie Hurts — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:11:59 -0800

It's a sad state of affairs when I have to hesitate because I think that this may actually be real.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:15:44 -0800

Apathy Party, Corporate Party A, Corporate Party B... man you guys are spoiled for choice.

By: XQUZYPHYR

XQUZYPHYR — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:21:18 -0800

And yet I still find them more appealing than Libertarians.

By: SansPoint

SansPoint — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:27:34 -0800

I'd join them, man, I just don't really want to put out the energy. Also, didn't Futurama make this joke first?

By: lullaby

lullaby — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:28:24 -0800

For the Apathy Party, a whole lot of effort went into making that site.

By: Phanx

Phanx — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:34:50 -0800

We were aiming for satire, but it's a bit of a pain to think up, so we thought whimsy would have to do.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:35:09 -0800

Nice try, Republicans, but I'm still excited to vote for Obama even despite his flaws.

By: Shepherd

Shepherd — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:44:32 -0800

Could somebody summarize that link for me? I couldn't be bothered to click it.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:50:26 -0800

I'd join...but there's a Green Acres marathon on.

By: a3matrix

a3matrix — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:55:20 -0800

Here is the summary. Meh, whatever...

By: mattoxic

mattoxic — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:57:14 -0800

You people and your volunteer voting MAKE ME SICK. Here we have to vote in all elections. Recently we had the local government elections and my choice boiled down to some cunt that wanted to shut down the local skate bowl, and some desiccated old bitch that opposed live music in pubs. So I didn't vote, I got fined $70. And you're apathetic about voting for a person that could launch a nuclear war?!

By: DU

DU — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:58:22 -0800

Here we have to vote in all elections. Whoa, I didn't know this. That's potentially awesome.

By: teabag

teabag — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:01:49 -0800

Is it me or do things like this infuriate anyone else? I despise the glorification of apathy.

By: Eideteker

Eideteker — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:04:41 -0800

I'm voting Donner party. I say we eat the candidates and the rest of the rich.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:08:23 -0800

Is it me or do things like this infuriate anyone else? I despise the glorification of apathy. This infuriates me far less than the fact that any third party in the US is a joke and/or waste of time.

By: jsavimbi

jsavimbi — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:09:26 -0800

I would've joined, but them having a website done in Flash gives me the impression that they don't care about the membership at all and are basically out of touch with the apathetic demographic.

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:10:15 -0800

I despise the glorification of apathy. I think there's an oxymoron in there somewhere.

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:11:18 -0800

mattoxic, don't they allow write-ins?

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:11:46 -0800

I despise the glorification of apathy "Apathy and withdrawal in disgust are not the same." - Richard Linklater.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:13:47 -0800

Kirth: You have to turn up, take your ballot, write on it (in private), and stick it in the box. What you write is up to you, but you must get your name ticked off the roll, or you're up for a fine.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:14:57 -0800

Whereas withdrawal in disgust and giving up hope and ceding the fight to the enemy are very similar.

By: Kirth Gerson

Kirth Gerson — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:16:44 -0800

So mattoxic wasn't limited to the two morons presented. He could vote for anyone or anything he wanted. $70 to avoid writing some letters? That's not an act of conscience.

By: jonmc

jonmc — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:16:46 -0800

Fair enough, DU. The point of that quote is that there is a difference between being disgusted by politics and politicians (of all stripes) and simply not caring.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:18:25 -0800

He could vote for anyone or anything he wanted He could vote for one of the candidates, or he could spoil his ballot. He could not vote for someone not on the ballot.

By: supercres

supercres — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:28:52 -0800

Fry: Now here's a party I can get excited about, sign me up! Apathy Party Leader: Not with that attitude. Fry: Oh screw it... Apathy Party Leader: Welcome aboard brother! Fry: Yes! Apathy Party Leader: You're out.

By: Kadin2048

Kadin2048 — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:40:19 -0800

Requiring people to vote seems like a terrible idea. We already have a huge problem with so-called "low information" voters pulling levers based on hearsay, rumor, or the candidate's haircut; the last thing we need is more people who aren't really interested going to the polls and just getting it over with because they have to. Politics is facile and lowbrow enough as it is without voluntary voting; I fear what it'd be like if it were mandatory under pain of fines. The only modification I'd really like to see in the U.S. is either moving Election Day to a weekend, or making it a mandatory national holiday that all employers are required to honor. Allowing more people who are interested and want to vote the opportunity to do so is a Good Thing; forcing the responsibility of voting onto people who couldn't care less about the whole business is not.

By: Kadin2048

Kadin2048 — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:41:28 -0800

Ugh, typo correction (how come I can never see this stuff in Preview?): Politics is facile and lowbrow enough as it is with voluntary voting...

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:43:41 -0800

So Procter and Gamble's angle with this is?

By: krautland

krautland — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:46:01 -0800

joining a party advocating apathy is ~~oxy~~moronic. doing so this election season is the same.

By: ZenMasterThis

ZenMasterThis — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:53:23 -0800

I live in CT. If I vote for Obama, Obama takes the state. If I vote for McCain, Obama takes the state. If I vote for a third party, Obama takes the state. Remind me how my vote matters?

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:57:30 -0800

>Requiring people to vote seems like a terrible idea. Yes, but the important word here is 'seems'. Allowing electors to reap a personal advantage for not voting, which is the practical expression of voluntary voting, is far worse. The US voting system (for example) is full of disincentives for the average working stiff to bother, and it's only getting worse, as all of the bullshit ID requirements and other stealth-disenfranchisement moves show. Compulsory attendance for all (at the weekend, when sensible places vote) tempers this.

By: pompomtom

pompomtom — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 06:59:29 -0800

Sorry, on re-reading my comment, the US voting system is far better, if you favour the More Corporate Party.

By: liquorice

liquorice — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:04:03 -0800

Requiring people to vote It's not requiring people to vote, it's requiring people to show up and get their name ticked off. What they do with the ballot paper after that is up to them.

By: electronslave

electronslave — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:14:52 -0800

I look forward to reminiscing about this time in history. I can see it now: my hand resting on the railing of my hunting lodge south of Ballina, eyes fixed on the twilit horizon as bats twist up from the heated forest. "You know, (hot girl ostensibly over the age of consent), in 2008 I really didn't care about US politics either," I'll say. "Not until the giant radioactive psychic mutant squid beast destroyed Los Angeles. That was when politicians started reading my favorite comic books and caring about my concerns." Yeah, I'll laugh a bit. Knock back some brandy. Jump behind my home-defense laser cannon and start blasting away at the 7 foot bats coming to rip electrical wiring out of my compound. Which is entirely as realistic as not wanting to vote this year. Sure, I hate American politics, but why should I sacrifice even more of my generation because I'm lazy and selfish? The US needs a strong, nuanced voice (with strong feelings on domestic issues) and not some ancient putz with a suit and a smile! And that's why the Batman gets my vote this year instead of Alfred E. Neuman!

By: mkultra

mkultra — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:25:58 -0800

This is totally advertizing (click on their Privacy Policy link), but for what? I mean, other than the obvious fact that Corporate America does, in fact, want us to be apathetic, docile, and submissive? Actually, I'd be more impressed if it was just P&G just going balls out blatent with this idea rather than tying it to a product promotion...

By: mattoxic

mattoxic — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:39:29 -0800

mattoxic, don't they allow write-ins? they do, but I couldn't be arsed

By: ofthestrait

ofthestrait — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 07:50:59 -0800

If I vote for Obama, Obama takes the state. If I vote for McCain, Obama takes the state. If I vote for a third party, Obama takes the state. Remind me how my vote matters? There are many other electoral contests besides that of president that still have an effect on the way we are governed.

By: tiger yang

tiger yang — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:10:06 -0800

Meh

By: giraffe

giraffe — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:17:44 -0800

Remind me how my vote matters? I live in MA and I feel the same exact way. I made a good effort of trying to vote (in local elections) in my hometown when I was registered there, but now I'm living in the People's Republic so now my vote doesn't even matter in local elections. Granted, I love almost everything about my city, love my Congressman, but it's kind of demoralizing to know that going to vote has no real purpose for me, and I'm really only doing it so I can show up late to work. I guess I should be happy to be cloaked in my cocoon of liberal safety. I can only imagine how much worse it is for someone like me to be in a red state. How does Austin do it?

By: teabag

teabag — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:34:32 -0800

I completely understand the "My vote doesn't really count" argument. I think this is an inevitable sentiment in large democracies. We apply this group decision making process seamlessly almost daily ("Where do you guys want to eat?" "What movie do you want to watch?") where we see the result of your "vote". I know I thought this way for a long time; and did not vote at all. However I think you need to reframe political elections in the US. I find satisfaction in merely participating, not swinging the vote.

By: DU

DU — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 08:39:03 -0800

Remind me how my vote matters? The larger the margin, the bigger the "political capital". This is somewhat amplified in CT, home state of Joe Lieberman, who endorses McCain (in spirit if not in fact).

By: quin

quin — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:06:10 -0800

Their logo is a squirrel? I take it no one responsible for that decision had ever watched a one try to get at a bird feeder, which is to say, I can't think of many less apathetic animals. Now a house cat; the one that watches birds flit by the window and can't be bothered to open both eyes, the one that stands up after a long nap, stretches, and then curls back up for another hour or four... there is some quality apathy.

By: schlaager

schlaager — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:21:22 -0800

this is redundant, isn't it? we already have the republican party.

By: Foosnark

Foosnark — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:22:31 -0800

I live in CT. If I vote for Obama, Obama takes the state. If I vote for McCain, Obama takes the state. If I vote for a third party, Obama takes the state. Remind me how my vote matters? If any minor party gets 5% of the popular vote, they become a major party. I'm strongly considering voting Green in November. Even though it makes me think "VOTE GREEN. VOTE GREEN. RED MARS. RED MARS."

By: tommasz

tommasz — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:29:14 -0800

I became an Independent, but only because Apathy wasn't on the checklist. Next time, my friends, next time.

By: kingbenny

kingbenny — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:38:25 -0800

If I vote for Obama, Obama takes the state. If I vote for McCain, Obama takes the state. If I vote for a third party, Obama takes the state. Remind me how my vote matters? This shouldn't have to be explained, but if you vote for Obama, Obama takes the state by more. If you vote for McCain or third party, Obama takes the state by less. Those things matter.

By: tzikeh

tzikeh — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:44:06 -0800

Can we get a "Withdrawing in Disgust" party going? Withdrawing in disgust != apathy, and it's certainly why I'm staying out of this one.

By: TedW

TedW — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:45:48 -0800

Joe Lieberman, who endorses McCain (in spirit if not in fact) I believe it is in fact now. And that's why the Batman gets my vote this year instead of Alfred E. Neuman! Besides, Neuman has already been elected (sort of). But really, who gives a shit?

By: Bromius

Bromius — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:49:06 -0800

This is somewhat amplified in CT, home state of Joe Lieberman, who endorses McCain (in spirit if not in fact). Actually, in fact.

By: Bromius

Bromius — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:49:25 -0800

*sigh* Beaten to the punch.

By: tzikeh

tzikeh — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 09:57:22 -0800

Augh. Preview is there for a reason. Apologies.

By: kirkaracha

kirkaracha — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:01:32 -0800

Join the Apathy Party 08 campaign and make sure that nobody decides or makes a difference, because we couldn't care less Apathetics! Fuck me. I mean, say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

By: mrballistic

mrballistic — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:02:15 -0800

weird that the t&c leads to a p&g page: http://www.pg.com/terms.htm

By: mrballistic

mrballistic — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:04:01 -0800

(also amazing how lousy the p&g site is...)

By: tzikeh

tzikeh — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:08:07 -0800

Re: compulsory voting. In the Best of All Possible Worlds, great idea. In a country teeming with ignorant, misinformed, quasi-illiterate, just plain stupid citizens with zero ability to think critically? I'm glad so many stay at home and don't vote. We tried "literacy" screening exams before, but we all know they weren't really about ensuring that the voters were informed. Too bad a basic "Where does Candidate X stand on issue Y" multiple-choice exam couldn't be administered before access to the voting booth is granted. At least then a "compulsory" vote would also be a "vaguely aware" vote.

By: TheOnlyCoolTim

TheOnlyCoolTim — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:09:22 -0800

If you click "Let Me Out" on the front page you get the People's Choice Awards. The People's Choice Awards are produced by Procter & Gamble.

By: Caduceus

Caduceus — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:25:08 -0800

As much as anything else, it's people who support "Withdrawing in disgust" that gave us eight years of Bush.

By: scruss

scruss — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:26:33 -0800

SansPoint, I think that Rutland Weekend Television beat Futurama by about 20 years. Man, I hate it when people are keen like that ...

By: lunit

lunit — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:37:06 -0800

The problem with literacy tests is that the ability to manipulate them - and disenfranchise significant portions of the [poor and/or lacking basic access to education] population - is huge. Ignorant, misinformed, and quasi-illiterate /= stupid. Don't blame the voters; blame the education system and the media.

By: tzikeh

tzikeh — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 10:43:03 -0800

lunit, I do blame the education system and the media. That is not, however, incompatible with my desire to keep the ignorant from voting. Just because I can't fix one doesn't mean I can't wish for the other.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:26:20 -0800

The freedom to have a voice in politics includes the freedom to choose not to speak. The right to vote has to include the right to not vote for the choices provided. Otherwise, you're not free to choose. Caduceus: "As much as anything else, it's people who support "Withdrawing in disgust" that gave us eight years of Bush." Wrong. All the electoral votes in Texas have gone to the republican candidate in every presidential election since Jimmy Carter beat Gerald Ford. Reagan won Texas in 1980 and 84. Bush Sr won it in 88 and 92. Dole in 96. Because I thought it might make a difference (that 5% thing), in 2000, I voted for Nader. We got Bush. in 2004, I voted for Nader. We got Bush. The electoral votes would have gone to the republicans had I voted for Bill the Cat, or if I had stayed home. I have been voting because I used to believe it my duty as an American. It has been for naught. I can no longer vote with good conscience. My voting is helping the people who stole this country from us. It's encouraging the behavior. This year, I refuse to vote. I urge all Americans to do the same. This is no longer a democracy, and has not been for some time. Unless you have hundreds of thousands of dollars backing up your diaphragm, your voice is not being heard. However, we are all being herded. I'm withdrawing in disgust. If you vote, whatever the outcome, it won't be my fault. It will be yours for participating. I am no longer going to contribute to this charade passing itself off as a democracy. You can call that apathy. You can call it unAmerican. You can call it whatever you want. I don't care what you call it, so long as you don't pretend it's the reason for eight years of Dubya. That is a lie. To quote from George Carlin, "if you vote, you have no right to complain."

By: ornate insect

ornate insect — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:37:51 -0800

ZachsMind--I'm assuming you live in TX? B/c according to this, the presidential election may be close in TX this year.

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:11:14 -0800

OrnateInsect, I'm assuming you live on planet Earth? Because according to the media, the presidential election in Texas is always gonna be close. This time it's always different, and there's always a million reasons why. They are playing you. Don't believe the hype!

By: ersatz

ersatz — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:06:36 -0800

In 1946 about 30% of the Greek voters boycotted the general elections -the Communist Party, that had taken up arms, asked its supporters to stay home. You can bet the first party went on to govern without giving a straw that 30% hadn't voted for them. Different circumstances and all, but withdrawing doesn't seem that effective.

By: inconsequentialist

inconsequentialist — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:13:12 -0800

United States of Whatever

By: Caduceus

Caduceus — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 23:31:17 -0800

You can call that apathy. You can call it unAmerican. You can call it whatever you want. I call it fucking cowardly, is what I call it. Unless you are wholehearted, actively going out and doing something to change the system in a different way, I call you a fucking coward, sir, and I think you should go somewhere you won't have the rights you are squandering. I've read enough of your comments to determine that you're not an idiot, so you don't have that excuse. I'm serious. Choosing not to speak is the most useless, the most cowardly, and the most disgusting thing anyone who doesn't have the excuse of idiocy can do. Okay, you think the system is broken. You think that this isn't a democracy anymore, and that your vote genuinely doesn't matter. Okay. Do something about it. And if you are, good on you, and you can ignore this entire post. But I don't think you are. I think you're sitting on your ass, whining on a website, and not actually doing anything. If you don't want to work in the system, figure out a way to change it from the outside. Otherwise you're a waste of fucking space, and you should hate yourself. Because those of us who actually want to make a difference sure don't like you.

By: Mental Wimp

Mental Wimp — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:09:19 -0800

I live in CT. If I vote for Obama, Obama takes the state. If I vote for McCain, Obama takes the state. If I vote for a third party, Obama takes the state. Remind me how my vote matters? Thanks for asking. If I am a Republican operative and I want to swing the state, I try to convince as many potential Obama voters of exactly this sentiment: Why vote since my guy's going to win anyway? If I am successful at getting enough suckers to think this way, my guy wins and I am a happy camper. Now, granted, accomplishing this in CT is much more difficult than in Florida, Ohio, or Michigan, because the races are much closer there. But the principle is still the same.

By: captaindistracto

captaindistracto — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 15:17:10 -0800

Meh. Too apathetic to click the link.

By: The Light Fantastic

The Light Fantastic — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 16:44:52 -0800

If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!

By: ZachsMind

ZachsMind — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 17:44:34 -0800

Caduceus: "Choosing not to speak is the most useless, the most cowardly, and the most disgusting thing anyone who doesn't have the excuse of idiocy can do." You have a right to your opinion. I've been called far worse. I accept cowardice as a descriptor. "Okay, you think the system is broken. You think that this isn't a democracy anymore, and that your vote genuinely doesn't matter. Okay. Do something about it." Insanity is doing the same thing expecting a different result. You can continue to do something all you want, but it reaps nothing substantial. I have simply chosen sanity. You obviously have not. You may continue to call me names all you want, but that won't change the fact that you are crazy. "And if you are, good on you, and you can ignore this entire post. But I don't think you are. I think you're sitting on your ass, whining on a website, and not actually doing anything." There is where you are wrong. Whining on a website IS doing 'something' about it. NOT doing something IS a choice. I am doing something. That something is nothing. I used to do things you would classify as something, including voting. I am choosing to do nothing substantial, because before when I did something, the rewards were nothing substantial. You can feel all you want that you want me to "should go somewhere you won't have the rights you are squandering." The fact you want there to be a place where some people don't have rights? Means you're a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. I don't believe inalienable rights only belong to people who agree with me. "If you don't want to work in the system, figure out a way to change it from the outside." I have figured out a way to change it from the outside: I'm pissing you off. I DARE YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG. If you honestly believe doing something about it is going to change the madness that passes for humanity today, then by all means go out there and do it and prove me wrong. I will be right here on my porch drinking my lemonade and watching the cars rust, so when your doing something makes the world a better place you can then come back here and say you told me so. The more people like you I piss off by doing nothing, the better the world will be. At least that's the theory. And if I'm proven right, I have wasted no more energy on this theater of the absurd parading about as a democracy. And I will have had my last lemonade.

By: Kadin2048

Kadin2048 — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:49:12 -0800

Don't blame the voters; blame the education system and the media. There's more than enough blame to go around. Blaming "the education system" and "the media" is fine to a point, but there are lots of people out there who have access to lots of information that they don't take advantage of. In fact, the whole reliance on the media in the first place is a failure of the voting public to do anything but passively receive information. It's at least as much the public's fault for expecting all the relevant information to be spoon-fed (or in some cases force-fed) to them by unbiased reporters than it is the media's; today's media is driven by what the public wants to see. If blood-and-guts with a smattering of human interest stores get more eyeballs than in-depth political exposes, that's what's going to be reported. If the average viewer was interested in politics, more politics would be reported. Newspapers exist. C-SPAN exists. The Internet exists. For many voters, the only thing stopping them from being more informed is their lack of interest. They make a choice in what they watch, what they read, and how they spend their leisure time. It's not the media's job to force news on a disinterested public. The public's disinterest isn't a failing of the media, it's a failing of the voting public to take seriously their role in a functioning democracy.

By: teabag

teabag — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 07:58:46 -0800

I call it fucking cowardly, is what I call it. I like the tenacity and overall description. I just don't think that by not participating, you don't think you're not to blame. Nothing could be further from the truth. By simply existing in a country, you empower it. If you think taking the one voice given to you and throwing it to the wayside gives you an excuse and lays the responsibility somewhere else, you could not be MORE WRONG. If anything it makes you more guilty, although that argument could probably be made both ways. Simply existing in the state empowers it, whether you want to be there or not (even if you don't have the choice). In a "free" society such as ours you have the choice not to vote. And you'd be correct in saying "you are entitled to your opinion of my so called apathy." But don't think your non participation puts you on a higher moral plateau than the rest of us that do participate and try to incite change for the better.