California Politician Pushes MANDATORY Voting

P. Gardner Goldsmith | February 11, 2020
Font Size

“California lawmaker introduces bill making voting mandatory.”

The Yahoo headline – reposted from The Week – says it all.


For many Americans, it’s the predicate clause of the sentence that vexes and, while it is important, it’s really only half of the problem. As the syntax indicates, the subject "California lawmaker" also is important, and is the heart of the trouble, because far too many U.S. residents read or hear the term “lawmaker” and blithely accept it. Tyranny is the result.

The fact is, elected politicians aren’t “lawmakers.” They’re “statute-writers.” As 19th Century economist and philosopher Fredric Bastiat wrote in his famous work, “The Law,” there is a profound difference between “the Law” and “the state.”

The Law refers to Natural Law, and when it comes to “law,” there is only one Lawmaker: God. Humans who occupy political offices are not “lawmakers” in any way. They write codes and statutes: prohibitions and mandates foist on sovereign, self-owning, self-controlling individuals.

In this new instance of the phenomenon, a Democrat (what a shock, since Dems are ALWAYS spouting off about “choice” when it comes to taking the lives of humans in the womb) wants to institute force and government threats to make people “vote.”

On Tuesday (Fed 4), Assemblyman Marc Levine (D) introduced Assembly Bill 2070, making voting mandatory. ‘Democracy is not a spectator sport — it requires the active participation of all its citizens,’ Levine said in a statement.

Talk about obnoxious. This ignorance-fueled misapprehension about the political system in the U.S. (and California) not only gets it wrong about whether “democracy REQUIRES” active participation of all (that’s an oxymoron, since “democracy” is supposedly each person expressing his position, but requiring participation prevents each man from expressing his free will to NOT participate), it glibly assumes that the political system of the U.S. is a “democracy.”

As the Founders understood, not only is “democracy” not synonymous with liberty, it is one of the great threats to liberty, private property, and free trade. It is socialism with a mask; more precisely, it is collectivism portrayed by politicians and pop media pundits as “self-rule.”

As Frederic Bastiat also noted:

The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live off of everyone else.

 But Levine went on…

California is a national leader on expanding voting rights to its citizens. Those rights come with a responsibility by registered voters to cast their ballot and make sure that their voice is heard by their government.

Meanwhile, anyone involved with independent journalism and a pro-freedom message knows that it is “Democrats” and those associated with collectivism who push for online censorship, social media shadow-banning and mislabeling, Google blacklists, pronoun-policing, and FCC straightjacketing of the web -- all while promoting this kind of Newspeak nonsense about making sure your “voice is heard.”

Give us a break.

The feel-good rhetoric about the U.S. system being a “democracy” is pervasive. It has been pushed on students in government schools. It has been pushed in television dramas and in films. 

And all of it is nonsense. It’s what lyricist and painter Richard Butler might describe as “lyrical drivel, article sewer.” Self-rule means exactly what it says. It’s control over oneself, and it is the only avenue by which a human being can exercise his morals. Free will and “democracy” are diametrically opposed, for democracy is mob rule, and cannot tolerate dissent.

And “democracy” is the lie that collectivists will use to “make the world better” – i.e., make others conform to their mandates.

But if “the will of the people” is to be recognized, it must be acknowledged as resting solely in the heart of every actual person, not some fictional “general will” that might have been pushed by Jean Jacques Rousseau prior to the French Revolution. In order to express his or her will, a person must be free, and “democracy” does not allow that.

Only individual liberty allows that.

And that’s precisely what Levine seems to fear.

If he truly believes in people being heard, Levine would realize that he must allow each person to retain his or her individual voice OUTSIDE of state controls. The more decisions are tossed into the government arena, the less each person’s will is expressed.

Pretty simple.

And completely alien to those who want bigger state control over the lives of others.

So, instead, they use slick language and try to indoctrinate kids into thinking American government is a “democracy” rather than a constitutional republic that’s supposed to be held back in order to not trample more and more individual rights.

Many Americans believe that Benjamin Franklin once said,

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

But the point is that there is not supposed to be “a vote” on our rights at all. That’s the point of rights.

We don’t need to vote about them. We have them in our nature.

And mandating “democracy” on us merely pushes men and women closer to slavery.