I was talking with my friend Mike recently, and we hit the topic of politics. I said that I was voting for Kerry because, while I despise the â€˜two-party systemâ€™ we have, I feel that Bush is a bad President and needs to be removed. Mike is voting for the Libertarian candidate; because, while voting for Kerry is the Lesser of Two Evils, that would still be voting for evil.
Unfortunately, there is a difference between Theory and Practice. While I would ideally vote Libertarian I believe that in Practice that vote would be wasted. At this time, there are simply not enough Libertarian votes to win an election, and my vote will not breed other votes. If my party has no possible chance of winning then my vote will not affect the outcome of the election. So, in Practice, I will continue to espouse Libertarian principles in order to spread awareness of a worthy third party and I will vote for Kerry because Bush must go. Iâ€™m going to vote for the lesser of two Evils because in this particular battle Good doesnâ€™t have a chance in Hell of winning.
If one really wants to avoid a choice of the lesser of two evils, then you must positively act to make that third option a reality. Simply casting a vote for a third party on Election Day is a token gesture. Itâ€™s like lottery tickets: a way of appeasing the masses who want to be rich but who donâ€™t want to work for it. The people who really want that third option to become a reality are out working for change.
Yes, Iâ€™m voting for the Lesser of Two Evils; but I honestly believe that in doing so I have a better chance of removing the Greater of Two Evils.
Comments are closed.