Apolitical?

[Cbug]

I was just wondering how many here are apolitical, and if you are, perhaps you could explain why.

[Ferrus]

Most people who claim to be apolitical almost always aren't - true apoliticism is akin to nihilism. Usually they simply mean they find themselves disinclined towards a party system.

[earwax]

Will apolitical people even bother to vote in this poll?

[Cbug]

Would an apolitical person bother to even communicate?

Yes, I don't think apoliticism is strictly possible, but some people label themselves as such to indicate the extent of their apathy or dislike for governmental politics.

[Qfwfq]

I'm apolitical in the sense that I don't approve of any available parties in my country, and consequently I have difficulty voting.

No I'm not entirely apolitical as a rock or a tree, but I don't think the OP meant that it in the absolute sense.

[Gchrist]

I don't consider myself apolitical, just perpetually disappointed at the transparent pandering that must be done by every influential politician. As well as the public who are unable to see it. A person who believes that one man is the cause of and answer to all of a nation's problems needs to take a good look at where power actually comes from.

Personal ideologies don't really make a difference in a political system where everything is obscenely interconnected. Becoming more powerful is what the majority will agree on - the rest is just dressing it up to look nice to those whom you will have power over.

[foodeater]

I'm not exactly apolitical, but most of the time I don't pay attention to whats going on in politics. This could be because I remember when the Michigan government was shut down for a few hours because the morons running the state were too stubborn to agree on a plan of action. I now assume that the vast majority of our leaders are incompetent. It could also be because a lot of issues come from conflicts with religion, which I try to ignore anyway. Whatever those two things don't cover comes from political discussions being really boring.

[pangolin]

I voted no, as I certainly have political opinions, though I also do not strictly align with any party. I nearly universally abhor most Republican positions, and disagree with some number of Democrat positions, but usually wind up voting for either democrats or independents any time I vote. Democrats may have an o.k. overarching philosophy, but some of their particular products (i.e. political correctness) are just plain stupid. I haven't really investigated other parties much, as they seem to be concerned with more concentrated sets of issues, and hence even less adequate for handling general governance than the two major parties.

... hmm...

[Wild_World]

I consider myself apolitical. I don't like politicians; in fact I'm disgusted by them, especially during elections.

[Flatchett]

I try to ignore politics for the most part. Almost everything that happens tends to infuriate me, and I have virtually no chance of changing anything. What's sad is that even though I ignore politics, I seem to be far better informed than most of my (voting) peers. Out of the 30-40 people in my PoliSci class I was the only one who knew who any of the Supreme Court justices were. Fuck democracy.

[MoneyJungle]

I view politics as a necessary evil. I can't imagine any non-asshole willing to engage in them, but somebody has to. I stay informed and always vote, but can only handle so much "news" before I want to puke.

[ACow]

I voted no, but under all reasonable definitions I am.

The term "political" as many people use it, pretends there is a realm of information or points of view which are of a specific type and excluded from the rest of such human thought. Realistically however, it can pretty much cover any topic humans care to discuss, and I don't see any consistency or obvious barrier which will define what concepts, philosophies, or discussions in societies can be considered "political" and which are "non-political" except the fickle spirit of the times. I have opinions on many things in society which would be deemed political and so hence voted no.

But I hold contempt for the political systems, the thoughtless cliches (ofen of a thought terminating nature) of politics and beliefs they inspire, the animalistic tendancies of the common man, the sheer incoherent nonsense involved, and all the pointless and what I would think are obvious contradictions.

My country theoretically has "compulsory voting". I do not (and will try not to in the future) participate in the electoral system. Circumstances with real estate have seen my name removed from the electoral rolls, and so I am not fined for not voting like others in my country, and am also free of many of the other spurious practices whereby government or institutions obtain your name off of the electoral roll.

The reasons and nuances for why I do not participate are too many to list in their details, but I will give some tastes.

1. Will not make a difference, neither in my vote, or the distinction between parties. The differences between parties is often cosmetic.
2. No party reflects my beliefs in any way.
3. There is no way for me to convey reasons for my vote or my actual policy positions.
4. I cannot connect my vote to specific policies.
5. Voting for a candidate seems to be based on several logical fallacies (that I have access to their true opinions and actions in the future for instnace, that I have enough accurate knowlege about this person to gauge their future actions).
6. Politics is not about policy or debate, but emotion, popularity, special interests, corruption, collusion, and PR.
7. Humans are an irrational species. There is little point trying to engage in intellectual discussion with 99% of them. A social system will rule in politics, I have no desire to rule others or participate in social games. I realise my philosophies would horrify 99% of the populace.
8. Politics deals neither with truth, merit, fact, consistency, or any other property a philosophical decent human being should be striving for.
9. Another human cannot represent my positions accurately nor adequately.

[Architectonic]

Guys, politics is not just about the blokes running the government.

Virtually all decision making is a political process. Even deciding what you are going to eat for breakfast is a political question. Even if you are the only human alive, is is still a political question.

The truly apolitical has to be apathetic about all outcomes. Apart from the ideals of certain philosophies (I'm not talking about existential Nihilism), I'd have to say this is pretty uncommon. ;)

[Wild_World]

Guys, politics is not just about the blokes running the government.

Virtually all decision making is a political process. Even deciding what you are going to eat for breakfast is a political question. Even if you are the only human alive, is is still a political question.

The truly apolitical has to be apathetic about all outcomes. Apart from the ideals of certain philosophies (I'm not talking about existential Nihilism), I'd have to say this is pretty uncommon. ;)

:happpy: Right, if you understand politics as tactics, attitude, skill used by someone to achieve a goal, then we can't be exactly apolitical. There is another thread about "Drive and Ambition" - first should have these to apply "politics" in order to achieve any goals... Presuming we have some goals.

[Ferrus]

:happpy: Right, if you understand politics as tactics, attitude, skill used by someone to achieve a goal, then we can't be exactly apolitical. There is another thread about "Drive and Ambition" - first should have these to apply "politics" in order to achieve any goals... Presuming we have some goals.
Politics is also about who should get to make decisions, who should have influence, the power of interest groups, the structure of the economy and concepts of natural rights and legitimate representation. Most people do have at least crude conceptions of what is politically right or wrong as politics is always implicit in any ethical code (which is why religions can't help but be political).

[Oso Mocoso]

Even deciding what you are going to eat for breakfast is a political question. Even if you are the only human alive, is is still a political question.

Okay, no. If you were the only human alive then I think we should all agree that what you were going to eat for breakfast is not a decision which lends itself overmuch to politics in that hypothetical.

That being said, I have don't subscribe to a political party or philosophy. I guess I don't stray too far from the "left on social issues, right on economic ones" which seems to be the common moderate American position.

[Puddles]

Okay, no. If you were the only human alive then I think we should all agree that what you were going to eat for breakfast is not a decision which lends itself overmuch to politics in that hypothetical.

That being said, I have don't subscribe to a political party or philosophy. I guess I don't stray too far from the "left on social issues, right on economic ones" which seems to be the common moderate American position.

I have to go with arch on this one...what you eat for breakfast is a political decision. What products we consume are directly related to what products are produced. If everyone decided not to eat factory farm raised eggs for breakfast, maybe pastured eggs would become more available.

I like the concept of direct action and boycotts in general. In fact, I'm boycotting politics in general at the moment.

[euterpenc]

I voted yes, mostly out of the fact that I feel that politics are an exercise in futility, distraction, and the decay of the highest qualities of human beings, while also being an expression of the lowest.

It is sickening, tiring, frustrating, illogical, irrational, and sometimes just plain boring. The only reason to be involved in politics is practical: to use the minimal say you have to make your own living conditions a little better. As for justice, morality, and humanity... well there is no place for that in the State, as the immense amount of fucked up shit accomplished through our political/government system will attest.

I am just exasperated with it, and I have realized that discussing politics just makes me upset, angry, depressed, or any number of other undesirable states; that is, unless I just choose to not care all that much. Why invest myself in something where the odds of payoff are minimal to dismal?

[Oso Mocoso]

I have to go with arch on this one...what you eat for breakfast is a political decision. What products we consume are directly related to what products are produced.

If you were paying attention, the hypothetical was "if you were the only person on earth". So ... your breakfast decision might be impacted by the consequences of what YOU produced beforehand, but as long as there is no one else in the world to be impacted by your decisions, I think it's ridiculous to say there are politics involved.

[ACow]

I realise I also left another of my reasons off, which I've always been fascinated with.

To rationally vote for a government or make judgements about its actions, I need to be able to have accurate information as to its current and future actions. I believe current actions may help one determine future actions, but those are forcably hidden from me.

All current governments explicitly hide many of their actions from citizens. They deny them through doctrines of state secrets, national security, in-confidence, right to know, acccess costs, deeming materials not in the "public interest", and outright lying.

Due to being smart, living in the political capital of our nation, having relatively intelligent educated friends and contacts, and having personal experience, I do have knowlege of many activities of government. I know we are spying on our neighbours. I know there have been instances where australian troops have been active in countries without the public's knowlege. I have first hand knowlege of how political deals are made, and I have also had first hand dealings with the media and how their stories are produced and packaged. I know the same thing goes on in all other countries because I am not a naive dunderhead.

But, let us presume that democracy is valid. To participate in it, I need a true representation of the world and the actions of the nation in which I am participating. I, and practically everyone in a nation, is forcibly denied this information at present.

I would put to you thus, that, practicalities of real-politik and justification for keeping secrets from citizens or not, what we are participating in is not even close to the theory of what democracy should be...though it has all the outward trappings and rhetoric of it.

And I, personally, can't be bothered wasting my time participating in a sham.

[Architectonic]

but as long as there is no one else in the world to be impacted by your decisions

<_<

I would also suggest that in principle, the individual is not the most devolved sphere of politics.

[Cbug]

Under the current system of (high scale) politics I think participation through voting is irrational. I have no hope whatsoever of influencing the system to conform closer to what I would desire it to be. So why waste the energy?

It would be more useful for me to have many close friends whose daily actions I influence through sharing information, opinions and reasoning with, than of voting in a useless ballot, or wasting my time following the political process.

[Lagspike]

I have always favored right winged politics so, no, I'm not apolitical.

[euterpenc]

Under the current system of (high scale) politics I think participation through voting is irrational. I have no hope whatsoever of influencing the system to conform closer to what I would desire it to be. So why waste the energy?

The one thing I thought in relation to this is as follows: recognizing that I hold a similar attitude as well as others, and seeing the voting rate at what it is, it reflects a lack of interest and concern. This means that the candidates must only cater to that part of the population that is voting. Since most candidates are all more or less the same, your vote will amount to little, but a big part of that little, is that it reflects interest. If more people vote, the more people candidates will have to take into account and try to please.

However, as Obama has made apparent... you don't have to pull through on most of the things you say you will. Politicians will say whatever they must to get the votes... and by then, it won't matter all that much if they follow through or not...

How disheartening.

[Arcturus]

I was just wondering how many here are apolitical, and if you are, perhaps you could explain why.

Sure.

I'm apolitical, cause I'm apathetic.

[Cicho]

Sure.

I'm apolitical, cause I'm apathetic.

Ditto. I don't even recognize most of my home country politicians' names, faces or views. Being an emigrant and not caring about them is probably the reason.

[Within]

Democracy is probably the biggest charade ever to exist with the exception to existence itself.

[Cbug]

Democracy is probably the biggest charade ever to exist with the exeption to existance itself.

True democracy is (seems) currently not possible. Hence the charade of feel good phrases.

[Zephyrus055]

I am apolitical in the sense that I do not participate in policy making or elections etc. The reason is that all mature governments amount to being a plutocracy. I have my ideas for how I would like things to be done, but there is no point pushing them because any bargaining power I could accumulate would be limited. In order to get the changes I want, I would need absolute power. Since that is not going to happen, I really just don't care.

[Randwulf]

I tend to act totally apolitical simply because I don't think expressing my political beliefs is worth alienating people over. But deep down inside a homophobic, racist, sexist, laissez-faire free-market capitalist lurks, just waiting to emerge and blow up abortion clinics. But rarely is it of any benefit to espouse those views. Most of the really vocal people are into politics for the same reason that they're into professional sports.

[carbon cold]

I don't really care, I'm leaving the country in a few years anyway. That's kinda the same thing.

[Apotheosis]

I have my ideas for how I would like things to be done, but there is no point pushing them because any bargaining power I could accumulate would be limited. In order to get the changes I want, I would need absolute power. Since that is not going to happen, I really just don't care.

What changes would you want?

[Roger Mexico]

"You can't be neutral on a moving train."

[Qlippoth]

I don't get involved in politics. This is mostly because I am unsure on how my participation in the political process would actually further how I think things should be. And even if I did have an influence, I am not sure how I would get from point A (where we are) to point B (where I want us to be).

What I know about human nature makes me inclined to think the process of change is something for what the results are not intuitively deducable, and something that is not driven on the individual level, which are concepts that I find uncomfortable.