At first, my Buddhist path led me to wish that I could treat all living beings, even bugs, as though they were just as important as humans.

Later on, my Buddhist path led me to realize that humans (including this one) are actually no more important than bugs.

I like libertarianism not because I am a utopian who believes that I can somehow create a Libertarian country congruent with my personal beliefs, but because libertarianism is a great source of personal ethics and societal ideals.

For example, let's take my status as a homosexual, somebody who prefers romantic and/or sexual relationships with people of my own gender. For most of my life I lived under laws which made it a felony for me to have sex with other men. Those laws never stopped me from having sex, and I certainly didn't feel guilty for breaking those laws, because I was engaging in harmless consensual activity between two (or more) adults. Even though I didn't live under a libertarian system of government, I applied libertarian ethics to my own behaviors. When I've advocated for my personal rights, I haven't limited my interactions to other libertarians, I've organized with Log Cabin Republicans and Stonewall Democrats to pressure the major parties to change their policies toward homosexuals, and I've supported various non-partisan groups as well.

Meanwhile, homosexuality has slowly gained a measure of public acceptance, probably because more people of all political identities have internalized some libertarian beliefs about sexual ethics, at least as far as what two people do behind closed doors. We still find plenty of discrimination against homosexuals, but at least I won't be convicted as a felon now for having sex with my boyfriend in my own bedroom. That's a huge step for me!

I find inspiration from libertarianism for other public policy and private behavior issues also. For example, I recently debated school vouchers with some of my friends, because my locality is running a pilot program for 1000 students this year. I think school vouchers are great, because they give poor students the same types of choices I had. During my childhood I went to a combination of private, parochial, and public schools, depending on which schools appeared best qualified to fit my personal needs as a student. My friends think that school vouchers will "destroy" public schools, because they think in terms of offering one government solution to everybody instead of allowing creative market forces to meet diverse sets of educational needs.

I apply libertarian ideas to other pet issues of mine, such as the US war against Iraq, terror-inspired restrictions on civil liberties, and laws against drug use. I don't believe that libertarian ideals will ever consistently control the public stage, but I think it is important to voice libertarian approaches as each issue arises in the public consciousness.

When it comes to voting, I'm not sure that all people who like libertarian ideas should always vote Libertarian. Somebody in a battleground state might choose to vote for Kerry because they don't want the Republicans controlling the entire machinery of the federal government, or for Bush because they don't want their income taxes to go up. Somebody might choose to vote for Nader because he's the most prominent independent candidate with new ideas for reforming government. Or, somebody might choose to vote for Badnarik because they want to increase the overall vote tally for Libertarians and make the two major parties worry about how they can appropriate our best issues.

The "wasted vote" theory holds that anybody who votes for a "third" party or independent candidate is wasting her vote because there is no chance such a candidate can win, and because she is losing her chance to affect the outcome between the two "major" party candidates.

The wasted vote theory is simply inapplicable to a group of hundreds of millions of voters, all of whom vote in secret. The laws of probability (i.e., the Binomial Distribution) do not support such a theory in this context, and there's no way to know ahead of time what all of your fellow citizens will do, no way to know ahead of time whether you'd be casting the deciding vote.

The only way a person does not "waste" any of her voting power is when she is known by all parties to be the deciding vote and she specifically bargains with each potential winner for the highest tangible benefit in return for casting the deciding vote.

Given the probabilities, my calculations show that, even if you could know this ahead of time, you'd be casting the deciding Presidential vote (out of 130,000,000 voters) about once every 120,000 years. (The odds are actually greater that you'll die on Election Day, never knowing the outcome of the election.)

Otherwise, voting is merely expressing a preference. So why not express your preference for the choice you most prefer?

-----

After discussing the "wasted vote" theory with various LJers, I've concluded the following:

The chance that my vote will decide the Presidential election is zero, because I don't live in a "battleground" state. In fact, I don't live in a state at all, I live in the District of Columbia, which typically votes 85% for the Democrat, and less than 10% for the Republican. Even if I did live in a "battleground" state, my statistical calculations estimate that one vote will decide the US presidential election approximately once every 120,000 years. The US hasn't existed that long, and probably won't exist that long. We'll probably never have a US presidential election decided by one vote. So, why should I, or anybody else, care about my vote? Big Fuc'in Deal!

However, the chance that my personal advocacy for a particular candidate will either decide or "spoil" the election, by changing other people's votes, is unknowable. This unknowable quantity is what causes so many of us to obsess about politics, regardless of our ideologies or political party identifications. Instead of treating other potential voters as rational adults who can make up their own minds on their own, we expend lots of energy and $$$ trying to convince other people to join our cause. Instead of treating each candidate as an honorable public servant, we often trash the candidates we don't support and idealize the candidates we do support.

Therefore, nearly all of the effort we spend on politics is based on the unquantifiable belief that other people's minds are subject to our influence and control.

-----

During my lifetime, the Democratic nominee for President has never received more than 50% of the popular vote. LBJ was the last Democratic nominee to get more than 50% of the popular vote, in 1964. Before that, you have to go back to FDR in 1944. Before FDR, you have to go back to 1876 (and Democrat Samuel Tilden still lost the electoral vote to the Republican).

Democratic candidates for President are rarely popular with a true majority of voters.

As bad as GWB is for the country, most people aren't swarming to support Kerry instead.

-----

Four years ago I liked Nader and the Green Party a lot. But, despite sporting a Nader bumper sticker on my car, I still voted for Gore, because I lived in a state where Gore needed my help to beat Bush.

Now I live in DC, where Bush won't even break out of single digits; it won't hurt Kerry if I vote Green this time ...

Many progressives are telling their friends and followers to vote for Kerry if they live in a swing state, and for Cobb (the Green) if they live in a safe state. The problem with this strategy is that it keeps Kerry from getting a majority of the popular vote. So even if Kerry wins, he won't have a true mandate for governing the country. He might, like Bush did in 2000, narrowly win the electoral college while losing the popular vote. Even if he wins, Kerry will be forced to deal with moderate Republicans and conservative Democrats to get anything done.

Progressives like to think they are moving the country to the left if they vote their conscience, by voting their hopes instead of their fears. But that strategy makes Democratic candidates move to the right to form winning coalitions, and deprives Democratic candidates of the large majorities necessary to govern effectively. When FDR and LBJ won by large majorities, they moved the country to the left. Clinton didn't win a majority of the popular vote, to survive he had to "triangulate" by stealing issues from the Republicans.

Oh, how history might have turned out differently, if Moses had returned from a backyard BBQ with a bunch of lesbians holding forth a copy of The Ten Suggestions ...

Moses: It was late afternoon, and most of us were tripping on some great acid, when suddenly the sky opened up and the Goddess appeared! After enjoying some meat and mead with us, she scribbled the following Ten Suggestions on some Hello Kitty stationery, and then disappeared with a flourish.

(1) I am the wonderful Goddess, who enjoyed your hospitality, but I suggest you investigate all the world's religions, to see how different groups of people have found similar approaches to the difficult questions of human life.

(2) You can make pictures of me all you want, but that doesn't make you special.

(3) Nobody really knows what I think, so don't speak as though you are speaking for me.

(4) At least one day per week should be your own, to do as you please, no work duties, no chores, just fun and relaxation. Even the Goddess takes vacations! (Unfortunately, it's always during my vacations when those horrible World Wars break out.)

(5) We all dishonor our parents from time to time, that's part of growing up, but try to patch things up with them after you move out.

(6) Only kill something if you are willing to eat it.

(7) Don't entice people to break their relationship agreements just so you can shoot your load.

(8) Don't steal from people who have less than you have.

(9) Usually it is best to tell the truth, but you do have the right to remain silent.

(I wrote these rules on September 27, 2001)

1. Everybody experiences every human emotion at some point; but people are not always open and honest about their feelings.

2. Everybody breaks rules; but people are not always open and honest about their behavior.

3. Most people have cheated or will cheat on their monogamous partners; but they won't always confess.

4. Most people justify their own opinions by thinking that people who disagree are stupid or lying or evil.

5. Most people complain about "those in charge", and believe that they would do a better job than "those in charge".

6. Once people are actually "in charge" they usually discover that things are much more difficult to control than they thought.

7. Most people don't act like living itself is always a miracle.

8. People adjust to their surroundings, take good things for granted, and complain about bad things.

9. People won't grow unless they are exposed to stressful circumstances; but some people break when they are exposed to stressful circumstances.

(I wrote this on September 9, 2002)

Over the past couple of years my former idealism about politics has shattered, and every so often when I read about politics in the media I feel like I'm grinding the shards into my skin.

I feel like democracy is really about groups of people trying to boss each other around for personal gain.

Most of the time the bossy groups are relatively powerful or well-off already, and just want more. [e.g., see the Republican Party]

Sometimes the bossy groups claim to be motivated by injustice and inequality, which will always exist, no matter how many laws we pass. [e.g., see Democrats, HRC, NAACP, NOW, etc.]

-----

Over the weekend my local councilmember dropped by my Safeway while I was buying groceries. Her minions were handing out flyers. She was wearing her own campaign t-shirt, and listening to the concerns of apparent voters. The voter she was listening to when I walked by was upset about teenagers playing with skateboards.

Ah, yes, take away the children's toys, that's what democracy is all about.

I feel like most voters don't care about principles, or equality, or justice, they just want to boss people around. We don't like those people over there selling drugs. We don't like those people over there letting their grass grow long. We don't like those people over there dancing all night. We don't like those people over there having sex. We don't like those people over there riding their skateboards. Etc.

So, the politicians make an occasional public gesture to show they are against these horrible activities.

Then, the politicians get back to their real business, which is to keep their wealthy/powerful backers wealthy/powerful by passing complex laws and budgets that none of us have the time to analyze.