The No-party

[Skybird]

First I thought this is a joke, then I realised that the concept has quite some appeal.

In Germany, Lower Saxony, a man has founded a party, named the "Nein-Partei". The party program is brief, and just says this: in every vote in parliament, the No-party votes with "No". In EVERY vote. Only exception is rulings over processes to shift more direct power back to the citizens.

The guy gives these reasons: many people realise that the corrupted parties we have today and that are infiltrated by lobbyists and bribery from top to bottom, cannot be left in power anymore, and that the very system itself has been tweaked by these parties so that any election always produces outcomes that just bring people into power that are product of these party'S inner mechanisms, and that the level of incompetence and dilattantism has stepped beyond the border to open crime.

If you do not want to support this as a voter, your only option is to either not going to vote, to make your voting billet invalid, or to vote for a party that you know will not pass the 5% hurdle. In any way, this has no effect on the number of seats parties gain inside the parliament. A drop in voting participation from 75 to 70% or so mans little. Only such a drop to let'S say 5% would send a message that the politgangster sin power and the people alike can no longer ignore.

And votring "for the lesser evil" also is no option, since all parties present in parliament have lost their senses and act selfish, criminal, irresponsible, and in expolciit denial of realities. There is no lesser evil to be found amongst them. They all represent small variations in the utmost evil possible. Making a choice here? Hilarious! Die dümmsten Kälber wählen sich ihre Metzger selber!

Having a No-party in parliament means to have members of parliament in place that give those voters rejecting the system and the other parties a voice and a voting power inside parliament - by voting against EVERYTHING with No, in place of these citizens.

That is much more effective to demask the immense rejection the parties face in public, and that they just ignore because they are left the freedom to ignore it.

He says this general rule to always vote with No makes his party quite immune to corruption and lobbyism as well.

I think the background is quite serious here. Over the past 4 years at the latest we have seen, during the "Euro-rescue", that there is no real option in parliament anymore to say No to the mess that is unfolding. Everybody is being told and says himself that doing what is being done is "without alternative". Proposals formally released by the EU polit burerau by legal status are obligatory to be agreed to by nations, always, which is nothing else but a disempowerement of parliaments that citizens in the countries have voted for - why are they voting for these parliaments if they are powerless towards Brussel and canot say No, and if any decision here in Germany made by the German chancellor is sold as "without alternative", "saying No fobids itself"? That are no elections anymore - that are fake events to keep the crowd in the streets silent.

There is plenty of lobbyism, of parties having hijacked the parliamentary mechanisms that were meant to lead to debates that are held in a climate of that the outcome is still being open. Instead we see trench warfare all day long, no dialogues, no honest competition of arguments, no talk and listening and vice versa, no dialogue, but plenty of monologues to justify one'S own claim for career and for power, usually with at least two thirds of the parliament not even being present. And before parliamentary votes, quite many of them time and again say before and afterwards that they do not really know what the issue is all about, but that that is okay since things being like this is the daily routine, and that they vote with their party in order to bring the vote through parliament for the purpose of letting their party shine.

That is idiotic. That is no democracy. And people supporting these ways imo honestely do not deserve demcoracy at all, but should be coimmanded and regulated indeed. Freedom is not so much a right that enforces itself, freedom more is an acchievement, it needs according competence and skill to achieve it, and if its defence is given up in the name of old habits or individual laziness, then the result is not freedom and democracy, but a self-petrifying in old patterns and schemes that are not being followed because people actively weigh pros and cons and judge the consequences, but right because the petrified state of things. Freedom needs responsibility, there is no democracy without always having the free choice between Yes and No, any voting behavioiur in parliamnt in the name of party discipline and along the frontlines of said (corrupted and lobbyism-infested) parties, is a direct and full assault onto democracy.

There is an implication that makes this new party additionally attractive: a party that promises to systematically vote with NO in any vote there is in parliament, will only be voted for by people who want exactly this and nothing else. If this effects the parliament'S work and brings it more back into line with the will of the voter, then the No-party automatically will loose influence at the next election. Thus this party is almost immune to drifting away from voters' will and desire, or to ursupate powers for itself against the will of the people, and to vote any different than the voters wanted it to vote. It also is imune to be hijacked by self-paralysing that gets inflicted by rivalling party wings, or to get hijacked and eroded by lobbyists or by bribery.

I'll have an eye on this party, and see how it grows - or not - in size and support that it gets. Possible that at the next elections I will vote for the first time again since a very very long time.


link

Unsere Partei beruft sich einzig und allein auf das uns Menschen natürlich gegebene Recht, "Nein" zu sagen. In jeder Situation im privaten Leben hat man das Recht, "Nein" zu sagen - und dies mit direkten Konsequenzen. Dieses Recht wurde anscheinend von den Machern des Grundgesetzes in Bezug auf Wahlen und politischen Entscheidungen übersehen oder nicht ernst genommen. Dem will die NEIN!-Idee ein Ende setzen.
link

[Sailor Steve]

I vote "NO"!

[Skybird]

One final thought: of voters, most already are considered by analysts to only vote due to habit, not by conviction, which makes the elected parties even less relevant than they already are. The potential of non-voters and people boycotting elections, is immense: depending on the election (national or federal) you have 25-50% of the voters boycotting elections.

If you could mobilise all of them to vote the No-partry, the No-party immediately would become the strongest faction in parliament, in several cases even seizing the majority of seats. If you manage to mobilise just every second of the non-voters to vote for it, the party would immediately be a major heavyweight that nobody can really manage to bypass or ignore. If you manage to mobilse just every third non-voter, the party would still be strong enough to nevertheless influence practically every vote by its No.

So, Steve, this might sound as if it is also a good idea not only for Germany but for the deadlocked trenchwarfaring dualistic polarity you have in the US. I sometimes thoiught that in America things are bit too much like in a sports competition or an "entertaining" casting stage show. American Idol, so to speak. If all your non voters would vote for a No-party, Democrats and Republicans immediately would be finished with their games they play. Couldn't be to the disadvantage of your nation, I would say.

[vienna]

This brings to mind something once-Governor, now again-Governor Jerry Brown of California pushed for a few decades back. He proposed and supported a "none of the above" option in elections so voters could adequately voice their displeasure at the candidates or propsoals being offered to the electorate. The option actually made it ito a few of the elections and seemed to have traction until, in one election, "none of the above" garnered more votes than any of the other candidates up for vote. The option was then quickly quashed by the main parties in fear of their political futures. I rememeber the newspaper headlines that read "Jerry's Nobody Beats Everybody"...

...

[Hottentot]

Originally Posted by Skybird

in every vote in parliament, the No-party votes with "No". In EVERY vote. [Snip]

more direct power back to the citizens. [Snip]

the corrupted parties we have today [Snip]

level of incompetence and dilattantism has stepped beyond the border to open crime. [Snip]

send a message that the politgangster sin power and the people alike can no longer ignore. [Snip]

all parties present in parliament have lost their senses and act selfish, criminal, irresponsible, and in expolciit denial of realities. [Snip]

makes his party quite immune to corruption and lobbyism as well. [Snip]

So basically you just copied the True Finns from us? Hilarity to ensue.

[vienna]

...in every vote in parliament, the No-party votes with "No". In EVERY vote.

Has anyone mentioned this to the House GOP? Oh, wait, never mind...

...

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Hottentot

So basically you just copied the True Finns from us? Hilarity to ensue.

No. They are incompatible.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

So, Steve, this might sound as if it is also a good idea not only for Germany but for the deadlocked trenchwarfaring dualistic polarity you have in the US. I sometimes thoiught that in America things are bit too much like in a sports competition or an "entertaining" casting stage show. American Idol, so to speak. If all your non voters would vote for a No-party, Democrats and Republicans immediately would be finished with their games they play. Couldn't be to the disadvantage of your nation, I would say.

I once had someone tell me the old saying "If you don't vote you can't complain!" I replied with "That only holds true if one of the boxes says "None Of The Above."

[Diopos]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I once had someone tell me the old saying "If you don't vote you can't complain!" I replied with "That only holds true if one of the boxes says "None Of The Above."

I vote. I complain. Nothing happens.



.

[August]

Maybe this would work with a European style Parliament but I don't think that "None of the Above" would work with our system of government.

What happens if "NA" were to win an election? Obviously another election would have to be held, maybe with new candidates. But primaries and election campaigns can take a year or more. Who occupies the office in the meantime? The incumbent? Some unelected trustee? And what happens if NA wins again?

It could go on literally for years.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by August

Maybe this would work with a European style Parliament but I don't think that "None of the Above" would work with our system of government.

What happens if "NA" were to win an election? Obviously another election would have to be held, maybe with new candidates. But primaries and election campaigns can take a year or more. Who occupies the office in the meantime? The incumbent? Some unelected trustee? And what happens if NA wins again?

It could go on literally for years.

To say "No!" to a destructive regime and a destructive policy and to criminally corrupted parties, is not destructive in itself, but aims at enforcing change and revitalization of this old idea of that the people should be the sovereign.

The past decades led us all to a chaotic party of Lemmings dancing on top of a seething vulcan. I think it is clever to say "No!" to a continuation of that, instead of just having another poll over which old record to repeat next - while the DJ already has selected the next old tune anyway and is just cheating the masses. And none of the records played ever is new.

We gotta break out of this stasis that we allowed ourselves to get lured into. Most people in Europoe are against the EU - strangely, not a smallest reflection of this in national parliaments, or at the EU. A deadlock of two blocks in the US - I promise you the trenches have been dug so deep now that the next elections will do nothign for America, no matter who wins.

The only legitimation elections give is: the legitimation of the corruption that has taken over the system. What party wins, is cosmetical only. To make people think they must stick with a corrputed system - that is what it is about.

"No!" Enough is enough. Since decades and decades it went from bad to worse. First the corrupted and the lobbyists took over, then came the incompetent career-egos, then formed up the present culture of public deception, the oligarchic marriage of business and politics in the same hands, then raised the utmost dilettantism that haunts our world today on all levels: arts, media, banks, economy, politics, education, even sciences, and it all seems to climax in the brain-crippeling media entertainment meant to please the crowds and keep them silent.

Panem et circensis. That is not a civilisation satisfying for a homo sapiens. But it seems to perfectly fit a homo demens.

[the_tyrant]

The government is a service providing entity
you pay them through taxes, they provide service

but unlike most service businesses, you government holds a monopoly.

And they actively crush the competition (ever tried starting your own government to "compete" with them?)

We always say that if you like or dislike a business or product, you should vote with your dollars. You should do that with your government too.

Legally avoiding taxes is not the idea. Legally avoiding taxes is just like using coupons at your local restaurant. It does not prove your point.

Just not paying taxes is also not a good idea. Unlike even the most evil monopolies, governments will punish you if you don't pay, even if you don't even use their service. Even microsoft won't charge me if I don't use their services. (on a side note, microsoft is actually quite good. They have never overcharged me)

If you have the skills, and you don't like your government, take over.
Get elected, launch a coup, organize an uprising.

For the less talented of us, if you don't like your government. Move.
Move somewhere where they actually provide the services at the price (tax rate) you like. Give up your old citizenship, get a new one somewhere. Of course, your current government must be bad enough to make you willing to go through the process.


throughout the years, countries and governments have succeeded where even the cult of apple has failed. Fanboyism is shunned almost everywhere. People would mock you if you would only use one company's products in any industry. But in politics, they call it loyalty, and patriotism.

I am loyal to my government as much as I am loyal to my favorite brands. I would use their service for as long as their quality is good and price is right. But the moment their quality goes down, or their price becomes horrible, I will not hesitate to go somewhere else.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by August

Maybe this would work with a European style Parliament but I don't think that "None of the Above" would work with our system of government.

True, but if someone feels that all the choices he's offered are bad ones and refuses to vote on that basis, then he does still have every right to complain. I on the other hand write in who I want, so people can tell me "You're only wasting your vote!"

The real problem is that no matter who I vote for, it's the wrong choice and someone will gladly tell me why.

[Jimbuna]

Would be good to see a candidate at the bottom of the voting list "None of the above but me"

[STEED]

I never vote for the rich conservatives, spend and bust labour or those stinking whore liberals.