Why doesn't every non-vote count, should be the question? A majority of the population—more than 200 million people—did not vote for either candidate! Approximately less than 20% of the total population voted for Trump; only around 25% of the voting-population did.
So much for a "tyranny of the majority"; "democracy" turns oligarchic, with a small class of people ruling the many; and with a small number of voters taking part in the elections.
No, this doesn't mean we need more of a direct-democracy; that would be a greater problem, and an infeasible one at that should every issue need to be decided by holding a vote. What it means the idea of democracy and politics as a means of organizing our lives and allocating resources is an absurdity. There's a market for that. We don't need politicians for our guidance.
But these numbers are quite significant: over half the population didn't vote! How is that not us demonstrating our wishes to not be ruled, rather than the popular take that it's our own fault whatever they do to us for not participating?
If a private company said "we're voting in a new CEO who wants to rob everyone, and if you don't show up and try to steer it in the other direction, you're the only one to blame", no one would take it seriously.
And the point is, no should take them seriously. Who are they, the sociopaths attracted to government for it's ability to use unjust force against others? Without your endorsement, they are nothing. Democracy is what gives cover to the ruling-class by inviting others to take part in the exploitation.
Were governments stripped of their legitimacy, which they obtain by holding elections and having special pieces of paper they point to, they would be nothing. Imagine if one single person showed out to vote. Could they possibly rule us at that point? Wouldn't this remove entirely any doubts as to their moral right to exist?
That's what I want: an election no one shows up to, and no one gives attention to the narcissists who desire such a post of power. I don't hope for a better voter turnout next time, as is the effort of many of democratic socialists who think the only way for change and progress is through politics, and all those who disagree are lazy and should be more active and involved; I hope that less and less people are willing to take part in their schemes in the future.
"The people" have spoken only to their increased desire to not be under the rule of a central government, not for their mass support of Trump as it is thought has occurred.
By these measures, Trump certainly doesn't represent and rise of white supremacy in America, or whatever leftist hysteria makes of his victory. 75% of eligible voters did not vote for the winner! That would seem to me conclusive that at least 75% of the population is not vehemently bigoted, as it's made out to be.
Thus, he isn't a sign of the average American's sentiment toward women, minorities, or whatever other forms of bigotry Trump is criticized for, rather than the real reasons to condemn him as President: such as his about-face on anti-war, bombing Syria and ramping up the tough-guy talk; his promise of America First, though wishing for tariffs and other policies that don't help Americans; his promise to repeal Obamacare though settling for the compromise of a failed bid to "replace" it; his flip-flopping on the Fed hurting Americans, or the Export-Import Bank that subsidizes big business; etc.
Governments certainly don't rule by unanimous consent, but if voting is the time of "tacit consent", they don't even have a majority! They never had the so-called "consent of the governed" that is supposed to justify their rule. We just need to assert that they really don't. One way, which a great many of anarchists opt for, is by refusing to vote!
That's why I don't vote; and not necessarily because I think there's something wrong with defending yourself when living in a coercive system that encourages you to. I want to be part of the majority who demonstrates through their abstention that we don't consent to their system, and its taxes, regulations, and other laws that deprive us of liberty. It is taking part in a futile attempt to reform government, which also assumes that reform, not abolition, is all that's needed. It is being emotional for them, which they thrive upon. It is the continued faith in "better luck next time" that they're never going to deliver.
Maybe some are coming around more so than ever. Wouldn't one question their [democratic] philosophy if all it takes in their eyes for the system to turn fascist is one election? If it was Clinton or Sanders, we're in the clear, but if it's Trump suddenly everything is wrong with government? You would think.
It took the election of Trump for the political-Left to see the merit behind what is traditionally a libertarian-call for secession and withdrawing from the system. They don't want to be ruled by him either, although they're content to impose their preferred ruler on others. Perhaps they're coming around, seeing that organizing millions of people into one system is the cause of conflict and division that prolongs the struggle for individual liberty.
It's all a sick system we shouldn't play into. They need us to, as, without us appearing to "consent" via the ballot box, they have nothing; they're standing there naked, trying to act like they have the right to rule us. Make them feel they're as illegitimate as they truly are and stop with the voting nonsense.