[1193] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Creighton/Brar
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Katherine H. Allen)
Thu Mar 14 14:13:43 2002
Message-ID: <200203141849.NAA18100@dodecahedron.mit.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2002 13:49:50 -0500
From: "Katherine H. Allen" <katallen@MIT.EDU>
To: MIT-Talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 14 Mar 2002 09:11:53 PST."
<F181HTQy9cqr8mjjjoR00017f79@hotmail.com>
> Well, I can't reply to all these e-mails, but since
> you're the first...
Cool. I'm exerpting your email to me, with the entire message reprinted
at the bottum, so as not to misrepresent your statements.
I was hoping to get your permission before ccing this, but you have
not responded to my request.
> Is that little Webster definition really all you think
> democracy is?
No, but it was the most convenient definition at hand. I don't have
time to write an essay on "what democracy means to me"
It would be fine with you if a candidate
> for local or national office offered money in direct
> exchange for votes?
Offered? Sure. I wouldn't vote for him/her, because I think that is
inethical. However, I respect the way that the system works and is intended
to work, and understand that my opinion may not be in the majority.
It is no more fair for me to impose the ethical minority's opinion
on the inethical masses (assuming that ethics are the domain of the minority,
but hold with me here--i'm working up to something) than it would be for
me to impose my religion on those same masses. If voters are willing to
accept a candidate who feels that he needs to buy their votes, that means
that either they feel their vote is essentially worthless (or worth less than
$10, which I feel to be the same thing) or that they feel he will accurately
represent their interests and needs.
You're entitled to your opinion, but
> you might at least be interested to know that your view
> does not correspond with the way elections work in
> America or any other democratic country.
Actually, that *is* the way elections work. Lobbyists and large companies
are usually the ones providing the money, but certainly for US elections,
you need to have the money to get your voice heard.
In the modern US electoral process, he who shouts loudest usually wins.
I wish it were not so, so I cast my votes according to my consience and desire
and do my best to rally the support of likeminded individuals who might
not have thought about what their needs are.
Creighton and Brar haven't broken any rules, and they haven't violated the
spirit of the election as I understand it. I don't like it, and it depresses me
that so many people think that their opinion in this matter is worth less
than $10, but I think that the UA as a representative organization
will be better for that knowledge.
Kat
original message
______________________________-
Well, I can't reply to all these e-mails, but since
you're the first...
Is that little Webster definition really all you think
democracy is? It would be fine with you if a candidate
for local or national office offered money in direct
exchange for votes? You're entitled to your opinion, but
you might at least be interested to know that your view
does not correspond with the way elections work in
America or any other democratic country.
- JDS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Documentation on the use of the mailing lists mit-talk, all-talk,
mit-news, housing-talk, and the mit-talk Zephyr class is available at:
http://web.mit.edu/institvte/talk/
