Doug Casey's Top Five Reasons Not To Vote

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Doug Casey of Casey Research,

L: Doug, we've spoken about presidents. We have a presidential election coming up in the US – an election that could have significant consequences on our investments. But given the views you've already expressed on the Tea Party movement and anarchy, I'm sure you have different ideas. What do you make of the impending circus, and what should a rational man do?

Doug: Well, a rational man, which is to say, an ethical man, would almost certainly not vote in this election, or in any other – at least above a local level, where you personally know most of both your neighbors and the candidates.

L: Why? Might not an ethical person want to vote the bums out?

Doug: He might feel that way, but he'd better get his emotions under control. I've thought about this. So let me give you at least five reasons why no one should vote.

The first reason is that voting is an unethical act, in and of itself. That's because the state is pure, institutionalized coercion. If you believe that coercion is an improper way for people to relate to one another, then you shouldn't engage in a process that formalizes and guarantees the use of coercion.

L: It's probably worth defining coercion in this context. I know you agree with me that force is ethical in self-defense. A murderer I shoot might feel coerced into accepting a certain amount of hot lead that he did not consent to, but he intended the same, or worse, for me, so the scales are balanced. What you are talking about is forcing innocent, non-consenting others to do things against their wills, like paying taxes that go to pay for military adventures they believe are wrong, etc.

Doug: Right. The modern state not only routinely coerces people into doing all sorts of things they don't want to do – often very clearly against their own interests – but it necessarily does so, by its nature. People who want to know more about that should read our conversation on anarchy. This distinction is very important in a society with a government that is no longer limited by a constitution that restrains it from violating individual rights. And when you vote, you participate in, and endorse, this unethical system.

L: It's probably also worth clarifying that you're not talking about all voting here. When you are a member of a golfing club and vote on how to use the fees, you and everyone else have consented to the process, so it's not unethical. It's participating in the management of the coercive machinery of the state you object to, not voting in and of itself.

Doug: Exactly. As Mao correctly said, "The power of the State comes out of the barrel of a gun." It's not like voting for the leadership of a social club. Unlike a golfing club or something of that nature, the state won't let you opt out.

L: Even if you're not harming anyone and just want to be left alone.

Doug: Which relates to the second reason: privacy. It compromises your privacy to vote. It gets your name added to a list government busybodies can make use of, like court clerks putting together lists of conscripts for jury duty. Unfortunately, this is not as important a reason as it used to be, because of the great proliferation of lists people are on anyway. Still, while it's true there's less privacy in our world today, in general, the less any government knows about you, the better off you are. This is, of course, why I've successfully refused to complete a census form for the last 40 years.

L: [Chuckles] We've talked about the census. Good for you.

Doug: It's wise to be a nonperson, as far as the state is concerned, as far as possible.

L: Not to digress too much, but some people might react by saying that juries are important.

Doug: They are, but it would be a waste of my time to sign up for jury duty, because I would certainly be kicked off any jury. No attorney would ever let me stay on the jury once we got to voir dire, because I would not agree to being a robot that simply voted on the facts and the law as instructed by the judge – I'd want to vote on the morality of the law in question too. I'd be interested in justice, and very few laws today, except for the basic ones on things like murder and theft, have anything to do with justice. If the case related to drug laws, or tax laws, I would almost certainly automatically vote to acquit, regardless of the facts of the case.

L: I've thought about it too, because it is important, and I might be willing to serve on a jury. And of course I'd vote my conscience too. But I'd want to be asked, not ordered to do it. I'm not a slave.

Doug: My feelings exactly.

L: But we should probably get to your third reason for not voting.

Doug: That would be because it's a degrading experience. The reason I say that is because registering to vote, and voting itself, usually involves taking productive time out of your day to go stand around in lines in government offices. You have to fill out forms and deal with petty bureaucrats. I know I can find much more enjoyable and productive things to do with my time, and I'm sure anyone reading this can as well.

L: And the pettier the bureaucrat, the more unpleasant the interaction tends to be.

Doug: I have increasing evidence of that every time I fly. The TSA goons are really coming into their own now, as our own home-grown Gestapo wannabes.

L: It's a sad thing… Reason number four?

Doug: As P.J. O'Rourke says in a recent book, and as I've always said, voting just encourages them.

I'm convinced that most people don't vote for candidates they believe in, but against candidates they fear. But that's not how the guy who wins sees it; the more votes he gets, the more he thinks he's got a mandate to rule – even if all his votes are really just votes against his opponent. Some people justify this, saying it minimizes harm to vote for the lesser of two evils. That's nonsense, because it still leaves you voting for evil. The lesser of two evils is still evil.

Incidentally, I got as far as this point in 1980, when I was on the Phil Donahue show. I had the whole hour on national TV all to myself, and I felt in top form. It was actually the day before the national election, when Jimmy Carter was the incumbent, running against Ronald Reagan. After I made some economic observations, Donahue accused me of intending to vote for Reagan. I said that I was not, and as sharp as Donahue was, he said, "Well, you're not voting for Carter, so you must be voting Libertarian…"

I said no, and had to explain why not. I believed then just as I do now. And it was at about this point when the audience, which had been getting restive, started getting really upset with me. I never made it to point five.

Perhaps I shouldn't have been surprised. That same audience, when I pointed out that their taxes were high and were being wasted, contained an individual who asked, "Why do we have to pay for things with our taxes? Why doesn't the government pay for it?" I swear that's what he said; it's on tape. If you could go back and watch the show, you'd see that the audience clapped after that brilliant question. Which was when I first realized that while the situation is actually hopeless, it's also quite comic…

L: [Laughs]

Doug: And things have only gotten worse since then, with decades more public education behind us.

L: I bet that guy works in the Obama administration now, where they seem to think exactly as he did; the government will just pay for everything everyone wants with money it doesn't have.

Doug: [Chuckles] Maybe so. He'd now be of an age where he's collecting Social Security and Medicare, plus food stamps, and likely gaming the system for a bunch of other freebies. Maybe he's so discontent with his miserable life that he goes to both Tea Party and Green Party rallies to kill time. I do believe we're getting close to the endgame. The system is on the verge of falling apart. And the closer we get to the edge, the more catastrophic the collapse it appears we're going to have.

Which leads me to point number five: Your vote doesn't count. If I'd gotten to say that to the Donahue audience, they probably would have stoned me. People really like to believe that their individual votes count. Politicians like to say that every vote counts, because it gets everyone into busybody mode, makes voters complicit in their crimes. But statistically, any person's vote makes no more difference than a single grain of sand on a beach. Thinking their vote counts seems to give people who need it an inflated sense of self-worth.

That's completely apart from the fact – as voters in Chicago in 1960 and Florida in 2000 can tell you – when it actually does get close, things can be, and often are, rigged. As Stalin famously said, it's not who votes that counts, it's who counts the votes.

Anyway, officials manifestly do what they want, not what you want them to do, once they are in office. They neither know, nor care, what you want. You're just another mark, a mooch, a source of funds.

L: The idea of political representation is a myth, and a logical absurdity. One person can only represent his own opinions – if he's even thought them out. If someone dedicated his life to studying another person, he might be able to represent that individual reasonably accurately. But given that no two people are completely – or even mostly – alike, it's completely impossible to represent the interests of any group of people.

Doug: The whole constellation of concepts is ridiculous. This leads us to the subject of democracy. People say that if you live in a democracy, you should vote. But that begs the question of whether democracy itself is any good. And I would say that, no, it's not. Especially a democracy unconstrained by a constitution. That, sadly, is the case in the US, where the Constitution is 100% a dead letter. Democracy is nothing more than mob rule dressed up in a suit and tie. It's no way for a civilized society to be run. At this point, it's a democracy consisting of two wolves and a sheep, voting about what to eat for dinner.

L: Okay, but in our firmly United State of America today, we don't live in your ideal society. It is what it is, and if you don't vote the bums out, they remain in office. What do you say to the people who say that if you don't vote, if you don't raise a hand, then you have no right to complain about the results of the political process?

Doug: But I do raise a hand, constantly. I try to change things by influencing the way people think. I'd just rather not waste my time or degrade myself on unethical and futile efforts like voting. Anyway, that argument is more than fallacious, it's ridiculous and spurious. Actually, only the non-voter does have a right to complain – it's the opposite of what they say. Voters are assenting to whatever the government does; a nonvoter can best be compared to someone who refuses to join a mob. Only he really has the right to complain about what they do.

L: Okay then, if the ethical man shouldn't vote in the national elections coming up, what should he do?

Doug: I think it's like they said during the war with Viet Nam: Suppose they gave a war, and nobody came? I also like to say: Suppose they levied a tax, and nobody paid? And at this time of year: Suppose they gave an election, and nobody voted?

The only way to truly delegitimize a corrupt system is by not voting. When tin-plated dictators around the world have their rigged elections, and people stay home in droves, even today's "we love governments of all sorts" international community won't recognize the results of the election.

L: Delegitimizing evil… and without coercion, or even force. That's a beautiful thing, Doug. I'd love to see the whole crooked, festering, parasitical mass in Washington – and similar places – get a total vote of no-confidence.

Doug: Indeed. Now, I realize that my not voting won't make that happen. My not voting doesn't matter any more than some naïve person's voting does. But at least I'll know that what I did was ethical. You have to live with yourself. That's only possible if you try to do the right thing.

L: At least you won't have blood on your hands.

Doug: That's exactly the point.

L: A friendly amendment: you do staunchly support voting with your feet.

Doug: Ah, that's true. Unfortunately, the idea of the state has spread over the face of the earth like an ugly skin disease. All of the governments of the world are, at this point, growing in extent and power – and rights violations – like cancers. But still, that is one way I am dealing with the problem; I'm voting with my feet. When the going gets tough, the tough get going. It's idiotic to sit around like a peasant and wait to see what they do to you.

To me, it makes much more sense to live as a perpetual tourist, staying no more than six months of the year in any one place. Tourists are courted and valued, whereas residents and citizens are viewed as milk cows. And before this crisis is over, they may wind up looking more like beef cows. Entirely apart from that, it keeps you from getting into the habit of thinking like a medieval serf. And I like being warm in the winter, and cool in the summer.

L: And, as people say: "What if everyone did that?" Well, you'd see people migrating towards the least predatory states where they could enjoy the most freedom, and create the most wealth for themselves and their posterity. That sort of voting with your feet could force governments to compete for citizens, which would lead to more places where people can live as they want. It could become a worldwide revolution fought and won without guns.

Doug: That sounds pretty idealistic, but I do believe this whole sick notion of the nation-state will come to an end within the next couple generations. It makes me empathize with Lenin when he said, "The worse it gets, the better it gets." Between jet travel, the Internet, and the bankruptcy of governments around the world, the nation-state is a dead duck. As we've discussed before, people will organize into voluntary communities we call phyles.

L: That's the name given to such communities by science fiction author Neal Stephenson in his book The Diamond Age, which we discussed in our conversation on Speculator's Fiction. Well, we've talked quite a bit – what about investment implications?

Doug: First, don't expect anything that results from this US election to do any real, lasting good. And if, by some miracle, it did, the short-term implications would be very hard economic times. What to do in either case is what we write about in our big-picture newsletter, The Casey Report.

More important, however, is to have a healthy and useful psychological attitude. For that, you need to stop thinking politically, stop wasting time on elections, entitlements, and such nonsense. You've got to use all of your time and brain power to think economically. That's to say, thinking about how to allocate your various intellectual, personal, and capital assets, to survive the storm – and even thrive, if you play your cards right.

L: Very good. I like that: think economically, not politically. Thanks, Doug!

Doug: My pleasure.

Irrespective of whether one agrees with Doug's politics, his investing record speaks for itself. And just like him, the analysts and editors at Casey Research dig deep in their respective fields and are blunt in their assessments. One thing many agree that the US will have to face, no matter the outcome of the presidential election, is its growing debt crisis.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
CH1's picture

Politics is barbaric.

I'm with Casey.

vast-dom's picture


And tonight when we the sheeple are once again distracted from the real events which will one day directly impact us allow me to post the following wake up call:


Every time The Federal Reserve purchases toxic real estate related products like MBS, is an instance when QE directly funds and aides global terrorists, local financial terrorists and organizations like Al Qaeda. The very individuals who created these real estate CDO products and derivatives worked directly and indirectly with the Russian and Italian mafia as well as Iran and Israel; in fact, Israel is one of the key Hamas/Hezbollah/Palestinian Islamic Jihad supporters. Every time The Federal Reserve props up the markets they are essentially setting up the immanent great crash that Iran, Russia and other financial terrorist players have a direct hand in. The proof is that these very same players were instrumental in the 2008 crash and as well as the DOW tumble on 9-11; in fact many of these global financial players knew and in some instances funded the hijackers of 9-11. If you think that any of this is untrue or somehow farfetched, then I implore you to read carefully the 21 chapters I have posted:


A sample from Chapter 8:


'In short, Kevin Ingram (former head of the Goldman Sachs mortgage bond desk; important errand boy for a network of market manipulators with ties to the Mafia; and a money launderer for an arms dealer with possible ties to both Al Qaeda and to a Pakistani who was in the market for components that could be used to build nuclear bombs) is perhaps not someone who should be handling “financial weapons of mass destruction” (e.g., self-destruct, synthetic CDOs)."


The global financial markets are significantly more frightening than the wildest dystopian doomsday conspiracy theory you may have ever heard. 


Shortly, I will post most on the blog an overview of upcoming geopolitical events with loose timetable, extrapolating in no small part from Mark Mitchell's above 21 chapters. These coordinated global events, merely compounded by the central bankers that print and prop up the very products that the nefarious financial terrorists have created, will ultimately play right into their naked short selling HFT fueled phantom shares and death spirals on a certain upcoming day that could very well take the DOW well below 3000. 


Excerpt from Chapter 9:


"Meanwhile, in the days and weeks following the Al Qaeda attacks, several things occurred. First, Anthony Elgindy helped destroy the largest clearing firm in the United States, dealing a serious blow to the American economy.


Second, Elgindy told the FBI that it was not he, but some of Michael Milken’s other close associates, who had advance knowledge of the 9-11 attacks.


And third, Elgindy threatened and tried to extort a fellow who had access to nuclear bombs."


And one more excerpt:


"As for Shabeh Jomeh, the Iranian social club co-founded by Man Financial’s vice president of trading controls, it might well be nothing more than opportunity for Iranians to get to know each other. But it might also be worth noting that in addition to being tied to the NIAC, Shabeh Jomeh’s third co-founder is Tamilla Ghodsi, a managing director of Goldman Sachs."



Click on the link to read more.

no taste's picture

You should vote.  Not voting is a defeatist position.  Just don't for either of the two losers. Vote for a third party.

CH1's picture

I do not authorize anyone to steal, and taxation IS theft. (Okay, more like robbery, but the point is the same.)

It's as clear as can be, so long as you don't decide ahead of time that the state must be sanctified.

One World Mafia's picture

Vote for Gary Johnson. About half the country is non electronic. If the riggers had it all sewn up they wouldn't be pushing for the National Popular Vote law. The National Popular Vote (NPV) slogan "Every Vote Equal" is dishonest because the NPV proposal is based on legalizing vote-stealing. For example, Texas or Louisiana could be forced to cast its votes for a candidate who won more votes in other states, such as New York.

The NPV is far along. Your state reps have been lied to. Tell them.

And tell them to resist efforts to switch to electronic voting because it can be easily rigged, or tell them to find a secure form of voting if you already have electronic voting.

Don't give in to the defeatists like Casey. Ron Paul's major misstep was he didn't challenge the Iowa vote count immediately. Months went by. There were even lawyers volunteering to challenge the count who were chomping at the bit but were rebuffed by the campaign. Ron Paul actually won Iowa. The riggers couldn't hide it forever because they don't yet have absolute power, but they would love for us all to lay down and roll over.

3rdgrader's picture

I vote we put them all in jail and start over

merizobeach's picture

The crux of the objections that there are no votes worthy of casting seemingly could be resolved by adding to the ballot the option of voting against any particular candidate, rather than in support of a particular candidate.  Votes for and against each candidate could be tallied, and candidates with negative total tallies would be precluded from taking office.  If no candidate finished with a positive total, there would have to be a new election with new candidates.

If I had such a choice, I'd consider to vote.

merizobeach's picture

I neglected to mention abolishing the electoral college.  It's a horrible system and a shame that it still exists.

Padrone's picture

Vote for one of the alternative parties. Like the green party.

You do not need to vote for blue or red.

The more people vote for a third or a fourth candidate, you divide the power. No one single party should have absolute majority. Make them work together. Create an opposition.

goldfish1's picture

No need to vote...diebold votes for you.

JPM Hater001's picture

"I neglected to mention abolishing the electoral college."

You clearly don't understand how the original system was designed.

President = Voice of the state as a whole. 

Congress = Voice of the people divided

Senator = Voice of the state legislatures (See the 17th Amendment...that was the lynch-pin)

Removing the electoral college only enables mob rule further.


Do your homework.

merizobeach's picture

"Do your homework."

You arrogant dumbass.  I haven't done my homework?  Eliminating the electoral college would enable democratic election of presidents.  For one example from 'my homework' we can all see that in 2000, Gore tallied more votes than Bush, and the entire Florida sham/debacle would never have happened, not to mention 8 years of Bush.

vast-dom's picture

perhaps next election it would be appropriate for the candidates to fight 5 rounds UFC style. i believe this would be more palatable and much easier to comprehend for the sheeple. there is no other way forward. i suspect Jesse Ventura would have the advantage and as such would not be allowed into the ring a la any 3rd party candidate. 


we are doomed.

vast-dom's picture

you clearly do not appreciate some rudimentary concepts. perhaps you may want to re-read the above article, because there is no viable 3rd party this year.


the only voting you do is with your dollar. and the ultimate FU vote is converting said dollars to PMs.

TruthInSunshine's picture

Simon Black's Top 10 Reasons Not To Vote This Year:


10)   You're In the Sahara

9)     You're In Uganda

8)     You're In Myanmar (Not Burma)

7)     You're In Phuket

6)     You've Got 2 Tickets To Paradise (so pack your bags, you leave tonight)

5)     You've Offshored Yourself

4)     You're Bernie Madoff

3)     You've Reconstituted Yourself As A Bermuda Corporation (You're A Person, But You Can't Vote)

2)     You're In Istanbul (Not Constantinople)


And Simon Black's Number 1 Reason Not To Vote This Year <drum roll>.....


1)    You're The Hon. Jon S. Corzine, with a strong pimp hand, and you can't be bothered, bitchez

3rdgrader's picture

What fucking election?

Oh, you mean the pretend election...

GregGH's picture

at 10:30 mark in video --woinder what RT blockedout when Casey says he is aspeculator ..and does .... ( blank ... ) ... hmm >?


Thanks vast-dom for posting  .... ( )

Gazooks's picture

Fuck Doug Casey and his self agrandizing Argentinian cool-aide escapist fantasy bullshit.

Vote because many millions of ordinary humans have died for the right to not have to live voiceless under the thumb of elite privelege-seeking cult-cultivating-cocksuckers like Doug Casey.

Just a fucking Jim Jones by another name with another game.

Meatier Shower's picture

You already live voiceless under the thumb of elite privelege-seeking cult-cultivating-cocksuckers.

Haven't you been paying attention?

Anasteus's picture

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin

Alternative's picture

You shouldn't vote because it is useless waste of your time because it doesn't change anything.

_ConanTheLibertarian_'s picture

+1 for 'do not vote' but too bad about the patriotism remark, especially in context with Doug Casey.

I don't think I've ever disagreed with Doug on anything. It's all just common sense but somehow many people are too stupid or emotional (or both) to think clearly.

stocktivity's picture

Four more years of Obama = 4 more years of Bernanke. Romney has already said if he is elected, Bernanke will be fired. Sorry Casey...4 more years of Bernanke we don't need. My vote DOES mean something.

CH1's picture

Romney has already said...

Clearly you have no prior experience with politicians.

TruthInSunshine's picture

He/She believes "just the tip" and "I'll pull out."

Aziz's picture

Anyone who believes that a candidate whose top donors include individuals affiliated with or employed by Goldman, J.P. Morgan and Citigroup will do anything to challenge or end the Fed is drinking some pretty strong Kool Aid.

ACP's picture

Sorry, it's too to pull out.

SilverFish's picture

What if I vote for Obama, just to negate your Romney vote? Does your vote still mean anything? Does mine? Answer: No, on both counts.


I think everyone this year should go find a friend that plans on voting for the opposite candidate you would have voted for and instead of voting, you both go down to the local bar and get shite-faced while the polls are open. Your two votes negate eachother anyway, right? Might as well save yourself the trouble of waiting in line behind all of the blue-hairs all day and have fun getting drunk instead.


Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

Romney's "economic advisor"/handler is Glen Hubbard.  That is all you need to know about his stance on the Fed.

Yes, he literally said we're "blessed" to have such great, talented people working at the Fed.  If the Bernank does leave, do you really think he's going to be replaced with anyone better?  If so, who, and why do you think this?



TumblingDice's picture

hahaha actually not voting is barbaric. The word barbarian comes from the greek word "barbaros" which meant foreign and the Latin word "barbaria" which meant foreign land. A barbarian was a person not of greek or roman origin. Roman and Greek citizens voted while the "barbarians" did not.

Western's picture

"barbar" was the language of barbarians, because it doesn't sound like a language familiar to you.


"barbar" of today's world is spoken by the bar association. the language is sometimes referred to as "legalese".


it's not english.

TruthHunter's picture

Don't vote? What are the alternatives? Shoot? Bow and scrape?

"Democracy is the worst form of government except for ALL the others"


Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

"Democracy is the worst form of government except for ALL the others"

Yes, we should all resign ourselves to accept the pile of dung as our meal, because at least it was sprayed with Febreze.

You realize you're quoting one of the most diabolically evil human beings in world history, right?

icanhasbailout's picture

The virtues of voting to write in Ron Paul:


1) It's a big "fuck you" to both major parties

2) It lets the fraudsters running the show that they're not half as clever as they think they are

3) If the write-in is not tallied it provides incontrovertible first-hand evidence of the falsity of the system

4) Your vote gets used in the way that a vote was intended to be used - to affirmatively state one's preference

5) It's a big "fuck you" to the controlled-opposition fraud called the Libertarian Party

HD's picture

I'm writing Tyler in. I want the first Avatar President and I want it now. Deer in headlights for VP.'s picture

Can you show me results of write in campaigns from past presidential elections? If no one knows the results how can they have any influence?

JLee2027's picture

I would suspect your write-in vote is immediately filed once you leave their site.

q99x2's picture

I'm voting for Gary Johnson because I can do so without feeling guilty.

JLee2027's picture

On a diebold machine? If so, you have no idea who you really voted for.

HD's picture

Unfortunately true.

TruthHunter's picture

"On a diebold machine?"

Reason number six, or reason number 5 rephrased?

cranky-old-geezer's picture



Doug: First, don't expect anything that results from this US election to do any real, lasting good. And if, by some miracle, it did, the short-term implications would be very hard economic times.

Nope, no "very hard economic times" if the right things were done. 

The opposite would happen, the real economy would start improving.

"hard economic times" are happening right now, and it's because Wall Street and the government are sucking the life out of America economically speaking, which means sucking the wealth out of America.

Since '08 over $20 trillion has been sucked out of the economy and people's pockets and given to Wall Street and the government.

That's why the economy can't recover and many people are sinking into hard ecnomic times right now.

Hey Casey, stop drinking the koolaid.  They want you to think doing the right things would make things worse.

It would only be worse fror Wall Street and the government.  Everybody else's lot would improve.

_ConanTheLibertarian_'s picture

Doug's point is that there will always be short term pain, even if the government would do the right thing and step OUT OF OUR WAY.

But long term it would be extremely bullish for the economy.

Treason Season's picture


What is TYLER? Anonymous reveals details of its own 'WikiLeaks' project


alstry's picture

Both work for bankers that say they are doing God's work

Historically, whenever the American people confronted a leader claiming Divine Right....NOBODY VOTED and we had a revolution.

It's time to milk off technology instead of each other.