Our system of voting works pretty well. For any particular issue, you have three choices. You can either vote for the issue, against the issue or not at all. Anyone who doesn’t vote simply has no voice. Everyone can vote, but only once, and it’s free for everyone. Pretty fair, right?
Now, I want you to imagine a different kind of system. In this new voting system, there are only two choices. You can vote or not. But, if you don’t vote, that automatically means you’re against the issue. So, anyone who doesn’t or can’t vote, for whatever reason, is by default, against the issue. There’s another thing. If you want to vote in favor of the issue, you have to buy your votes. And lastly, as long as you can afford to buy the votes, you can vote as many times as you want.
This would be a really bad voting system for several obvious reasons. First, is that the default response is “nay”. So, if you wanted to vote but couldn’t, you would be counted as being against the issue. That’s not only unfair to the voter but also gives those against the issue an unfair advantage. It’s also unfair because, if you’re wealthy enough, you can have as many votes as you want. Second, not everyone can afford to vote. People who support the issue but are too poor to vote are discriminated against. Finally, since poor people in this country are disproportionately minorities, this type of voting can also be considered racist.
If we had a system of voting in this country that was unfair, discriminatory and racist, people would undoubtedly be loudly demanding a change.
It’s easy for me to imagine a scenario where someone, let’s say the CEO of a spice company, offended some people because he had the audacity to say something nice about someone. I know, it’s too crazy to be true but try to imagine it. I can also easily imagine that group of people starting a boycott against the company because they don’t feel that the CEO should have said that nice thing.
Now, according to boycott rules, if you’re against the CEO then you need to stop buying spices from that company. But, if you don’t buy their spices, for any reason, you’re actually counted as being against the CEO and what he said, even if you agree with him.
The only way you can counteract people not buying spices is to buy more spices yourself. But not everyone can afford to buy more spices so, effectively, if you’re poor you don’t have a voice. More accurately, poor people actually do have a voice but they don’t get to decide what they say. Further, since Goya (oops, I let that slip) products are found in the “Mexican Foods” section of nearly every grocery store in the United States, this is clearly an issue that is important to at least some of the minorities in this country.
So, before you get all excited about punishing someone because he merely said something in support of his president, remember that “voting with your wallet” is unfair, discriminatory and racist. Which, if I remember correctly, are three things you claim to be against.
