Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
×




Details

Submitted on
April 27, 2013
Image Size
3.1 KB
Resolution
99×57
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
1,132
Favourites
25 (who?)
Comments
75
Downloads
0
×
If You Can Vote, You're Not Oppressed! by BlameThe1st If You Can Vote, You're Not Oppressed! by BlameThe1st
If you can vote, hold political office, own property, work for equal pay, and freely marry and divorce, you are not being oppressed. You have the same rights as everyone else in society. You are not a second-class citizen.

Second-class citizens, as their name implies, are people who are systematically denied the same legal rights of other citizens. With the exception of the LGBT community, there are no second-class citizens in America. Everyone has the exact same legal rights as everyone else, regardless of race, gender, class, or religion.

But this does not mean that oppression does not exist in America. It most certainly does. But it's not based on race or gender or sex or class or religion. The real struggle is not between blacks and whites. It is not between men and women. It is not between gays and straights. It is not between rich and poor. It is not between Christians or Muslims or Jews or atheists. The current struggle is between those with political power and those without it. The real source of oppression is the political elite: the government and the corporations that profit from it.

Fortunately for them, nobody notices their oppression. While the rest of us are busy fighting amongst ourselves over trivial differences, the political elite are slowly chipping away at our rights as individual citizens. They currently have the power to target American citizens for indefinite detention, lethal force, and even assassination. They have accomplished so much because we have remained divided amongst ourselves. They benefit from our division because it diverts our attention from them and their oppression.

If we are to stop them, we must cease fighting amongst ourselves and start fighting the real enemy. As the old saying goes: united we stand, divided we fall!
Add a Comment:
 
:iconmoxc:
MOxC Featured By Owner Feb 20, 2015  Student Artisan Crafter
What a load of bullshit. 
Reply
:iconshadowofwopr:
ShadowofWOPR Featured By Owner Oct 26, 2014
"If you can vote"
Given our first past the post system as well as electoral college, while we can vote in the presidential election, it won't really count because our votes are more suggestions.  Three times in America's history the actual voters have decided to go against the wishes of the people and change the election results because of it.  (Now in other elections your votes do count, so if you don't vote for local issues you can't complain)

"Hold political office"
I'm an atheist.  I'm still banned from holding political office in seven states.

"own property, work for equal pay"
Fair enough, though property is rather expensive. xD

"freely marry and divorce"
I lost several relatives because of this one, they all left the country so they could get married.

"you are not being oppressed"
...looking at you christians.
Reply
:icondrop-of-amethyst:
drop-of-amethyst Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2014  Student Traditional Artist
oh my god this stamp is fucking joke
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Sep 16, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
"Oh my god! This stamp is a fucking joke."

FTFY
Reply
:iconsnowmandom:
snowmandom Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2014
Really? Black Americans can vote, but they face racism and discrimination in the job market. Are you going to argue racism isn't an issue anyone?
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 12, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
No, just that it isn't as big of an issue as it used to be. Discrimination? We have laws against that.
Reply
:iconthinker1988:
Thinker1988 Featured By Owner Jun 11, 2014
Tell it to still uncivilized countries, people vote there too.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jun 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Hmm.
Reply
:iconmissmuffintop:
MissMuffinTop Featured By Owner May 9, 2014   Writer
I dunno, I've felt like being paid less for being a girl was kind of oppressive. 

Does this include equality of access to voting? What about felons who permanently lose access to voting, even upon rehabilitation. Or what about children who, aren't allowed to vote at all. Does your same construction imply that children are under the yoke of the adults? 

These questions are meant to explore the concept rather than me trying to make any kind of point. 
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 9, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
You lost me at the gender wage gap lie: www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmXjP6…

Seriously, feminists need to stop making that arguement. It's been debunked to the point of absurdity.
Reply
:iconmissmuffintop:
MissMuffinTop Featured By Owner May 9, 2014   Writer
I am not talking about the aggregate earning disparity. I am talking about like, Lilly Ledbetter situations. 
Reply
:icontravis-retriever:
Travis-Retriever Featured By Owner Feb 2, 2014
Is this stamp a joke?
I don't know about anyone else, but if I could trade in my 'right to vote' for conscription immunity, I'd do it in a heartbeat.  It's like voting matters.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 4, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
True. The draft is F'd up!
Reply
:icontravis-retriever:
Travis-Retriever Featured By Owner Feb 5, 2014
Mhm.
Also, the last sentence of my above post had a typo.  That should have read, "It's not like voting matters." Derp.
I knew I should have just copy/pasted the comment directly from Hawkeye's YouTube/Google+ comment. XD
Reply
:iconmistikfantasy:
Mistikfantasy Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Not true at all. Voting is the illusion of choice and freedom. When you vote you are saying "YES I WANT YOU TO RULE AND ADMINISTRATE ME".

DO not vote! Exit the matrix!
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Meh, I rather vote third party rather than Option A or Option B.
Reply
:iconmistikfantasy:
Mistikfantasy Featured By Owner Jan 18, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
en if you vote 4th or 5th party it is always the same.
Voting is the worst thing you can do for your freedom except some extremely rare and isolated cases.

When you vote you are actually saying that you want that people to administrate your life! It is madness!
Reply
:iconyoung-stoaty-chap:
Young-stoaty-chap Featured By Owner Nov 28, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I think you'll find it's a little more complicated than that.
Reply
:iconmistikfantasy:
Mistikfantasy Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
indeed
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Probably, but if you can vote, you are not a second class citizen.
Reply
:iconsonikkubumu:
Sonikkubumu Featured By Owner Oct 13, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
If voting changed anything, they would make it illegal
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Oct 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
True.
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2013
How do we fight big government and corporatism? If it were really a level playing field as you say, there'd be no problem! What can we do to get the government to rescind its special favours for supercorporations, numerous overseas NATO involvements, concentration camps (Guantanamo) and hostility to civil liberties at home and abroad? Is voting for Ron Paul really going to cut the mustard? The Libertarian Party will never ever win because of how entrenched the two party system is. Without campaign finance reform there is not a hope in hell of a third party candidate standing and candidates within the Demopublican party will be cut down to size by the party line.
Reply
:iconitachi-spirit-w0lf:
Itachi-Spirit-w0lf Featured By Owner Aug 22, 2014
This is old and I still love your avatar BTW. I don't know what but I like it a lot. It is a rather good looking avatar.
The only way I can think is to get a moderate third party member in there such as a member of the Independent Party or Libertarian. While you say it would be impossible to get someone from the Libertarian Party in due to how entrenched the two parties are in our government.
Remember this, just as there is a way to uproot a deeply embedded tree. You can rip out the two party system. The secret is in the roots. If we can get a someone like Gary Johnson or simply someone who is just a moderate Libertarian and truly appeals to the public and can implement plans in a fashion that is both pragmatic and that works. You get these people into the lower level government (city government and state government)  and you start cutting up and around until most of the roots have been severed then and only then can you make the biggest push (Federal Elections)
The reason you want people in the lower levels is because despite the lack of attention city and state governments are given. They affect us much more immediately than say the Feds. People are more likely to start seeing results at a lower level than the higher. If the results are good than we'll start going somewhere. It's going to be a tough battle but hey, good strategy and tactics will get us far.
Reply
:iconcalypsoeclipse:
Calypsoeclipse Featured By Owner Aug 23, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
Revolution!
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I don't know, and I'm not going to pretend to know.
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2013
I find your reductionism about the concept of oppression kinda curious tbh, and it goes against what you say about government power. You say that oppression is exerted by those with political power (politicians, lobbyists etc) against everyone else, which I totally agree with, but what's the problem? We can all vote, right? On this view, everyone has political power because every citizen can vote, which seems to confirm the first part of what you said but contradict the rest. I mean, it's either one or the other, surely!
Reply
:iconamanda2324:
amanda2324 Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I would inquire what you mean by "freely marry," and I would argue, then, that by your definition, children are oppressed, because they cannot do any of those things either. We /justify/ their oppression, but by what you say, it's still oppression, is it not?
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I mean they don't have to enter into arranged marriages as a manner of a business transaction. Only until this century, marriages were mostly for business, as fathers would have their children marry in order to have treaties and to gain land. Back then, women were seen as property to be traded. Now, they are treated as human, and marriage is done out of love.
Reply
:iconamanda2324:
amanda2324 Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I see your point. Though I noticed that you didn't address my question, which inquires about your criteria for oppression being perfectly applicable to children.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
It's not oppression. Children are unable to make their own decisions for themselves. Therefore, they do not have all the rights as an adult.
Reply
:iconamanda2324:
amanda2324 Featured By Owner Jul 13, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
But wouldn't that simply be justified oppression? We find reason to deprive them of these things and make them as second class citizens?

This is a question I've often asked myself, but I can't figure out a good answer, other than saying "yes, oppression is okay in certain cases - we just don't call it that when we think it's justified."
Reply
:icondefying-t:
Defying-T Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2013
According to a stamp you made, you don't even support equality. What're you getting at? Are you just playing devil's advocate for the sake of seeing how a libertarian would defend this view? Are you wondering what answers others would give, who also don't believe in equality for children?

Children are not equal to adults. They are undeveloped, and they don't even develop adequate human reasoning until their early teens. They are not mature, not responsible, and not free. They do not have, by fact of nature (not by fact of law) freedom/liberty, responsibility, autonomy, rationality or independence.

This is a non-issue, in reality, as children are potential adults. Just like how foetuses and infants do not have the same rights and duties as adults, neither do children.
Reply
:iconamanda2324:
amanda2324 Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
"According to a stamp you made, you don't even support equality."

And neither do you.

"
What're you getting at? Are you just playing devil's advocate for the sake of seeing how a libertarian would defend this view? Are you wondering what answers others would give, who also don't believe in equality for children?"

I'm wondering exactly what I asked in the question. (...how do I get my text to stop being bold?)

"
Children are not equal to adults. They are undeveloped, and they don't even develop adequate human reasoning until their early teens. They are not mature, not responsible, and not free. They do not have, by fact of nature (not by fact of law) freedom/liberty, responsibility, autonomy, rationality or independence."

You're simply justifying unequal treatment. So you are saying that children are second-class citizens and aren't as human as the rest of us, so we can treat them however we see fit.

"
This is a non-issue, in reality, as children are potential adults. Just like how foetuses and infants do not have the same rights and duties as adults, neither do children."

Which means you are also against equality. You support treating children unequally.
Reply
:icondefying-t:
Defying-T Featured By Owner Jul 28, 2013
So do you, right? So, what are your reasons for not believing in equality? I gave mine, what're yours?

P.S.- I advocate for equality for all. But children, on the other hand, are different, since they are not independent or autonomous. Hence why they shouldn't vote, or get paid.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconjoeisbadass:
joeisbadass Featured By Owner Jul 7, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
So true.
Reply
:iconhdswag:
HDSwag Featured By Owner Jul 5, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Let me be the guy to get angry.
1. White guys are evil.
2. White guys are in politics.
3. White guys are in economics.
4. White guys are police officers.
5. White guys hate all other races.

Oppression by the white man is to blame.
That sums up every problem in the U.S.
Reply
:iconirkeninvadermaz:
IrkenInvaderMaz Featured By Owner Jul 15, 2013  Hobbyist
Yeah pretty much. But not every white guy. Just like... all republican white guys.
Reply
:iconhdswag:
HDSwag Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Agreed.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Sounds like every social justice blogger on Tumblr.
Reply
:iconhdswag:
HDSwag Featured By Owner Jul 6, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Maybe social justice is what is needed.
If anything, government is only covering the wound, not creating it.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Jul 7, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
That really depends on what one means by "social justice."
Reply
:icontanakawa:
Tanakawa Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2014  Student
A lot of 'social justice warriors' on tumblr take it the wrong way, so I wouldn't rely on most of them. In reality, social justice is needed to not have people discriminated by social standards, race, gender, etc. 

Just because women are allowed to vote, it does not mean they are not oppressed. They still have to deal with being blamed for being raped instead of blaming the rapist. They don't get the same income as men just because they are female. And these are only 2 examples. Rich and poor are also a huge problem in America, however poor people aren't getting killed for being poor whereas gays are being killed for being gay, blacks are being killed for being black, etc.

I do agree that the government and corporations are a bug impact on our lives. It is true that a lot of them are negatively affecting our social standards. But connecting that with voting and oppression, it doesn't match.



So just by saying that "If you can vote, you're not oppressed", you leave a HUGE gap of information about oppression and different ways it exists in. There is a whole lot more to oppression than just voting.
Reply
:icontanakawa:
Tanakawa Featured By Owner Mar 15, 2014  Student
tl;dr: the ability to vote isn't the only thing that determines oppression
Reply
:iconhdswag:
HDSwag Featured By Owner Jul 17, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Well, because of my long absence on DA, I have had time to look at more white men, like that Zimmerman idiot, solidifying the need for stark social justice.

Laws enacted to deter hate crimes would be a start. And better jury selection, for another.
Reply
:iconoatmealftlotudo:
OatmealFTLOTUDO Featured By Owner May 2, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Why it's just like the citizens of Stalin's buffer countries in Eastern Europe after he promised to give them elections! They voted all the time! Who were their choices again? Oh yeah, The Communist party or the Communist party. Well they certainly weren't oppressed! Wait...


I can see from your description that you are specifically talking about in the US (which is a whole other issue), but the stamp itself is not necessarily accurate if you take other countries into account.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 7, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
True. My aim was at the "social justice" warriors who claim that "womenz is oppressed" and "whitey is keeping that black man down." So sorry for the confusion.
Reply
:icontheatticusnew:
TheAtticusNew Featured By Owner Apr 29, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
While I agree that LGBT's are an oppressed minority, I would like to argue that there is another that gets overlooked (though not to the same extent, or course). That would be the atheist community. In 7 states, atheists are barred from holding public office, which is a violation of the First Amendment, as well as disregarding the Torasco v. Watkins case in the Supreme Court from 1961. Much like LGBT's, atheists are not allowed to join the Boy Scouts of America. I know that discrimination against atheism is not very visible, but it does exist.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
I hear that gays have a better chance of being president than atheists. For me, I wouldn't mind voting for one, as long as it was the right one. Penn Jillette or Michael Shermer? Yes! Richard Dawkins or Sam Harris? Hell no!
Reply
:icontheatticusnew:
TheAtticusNew Featured By Owner Apr 30, 2013  Hobbyist Artist
Well, the example you've given aren't really politicians; they're philosophers (except Jillette, who's an entertainer, and an admittedly good one, having actually seen him live). We have had non-theist politicians in our government before, with Democrat Pete Stark of California publicly announcing that he was an atheist in 2007, becoming the first Congressman to do so. Sadly, he lost his seat in the 2012 election. Currently, the closest thing we've got is Democrat Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, who along with being the first openly bisexual person to be elected to Congress, also lists her religion as "None," and says that she has a secular approach to government. Still, it's unclear if she actually believes in a god.
Reply
Add a Comment: