Non-Arguments: If You Didn't Vote, You Can't Complain! (Arbitrary Qualification Fallacy)

[@LUX711]

I was telling my sister how TSwift is not a great singer due to her very narrow range. She countered by saying I have *No Right* to criticize Swift because I’m not famous & I’m not a great singer. Excellent logic right And that’s how I ended up here again ha.

[@MoonTaLoo]

Oh wow, you're pretty much my hero for the day for this video. Thanks a lot David. I knew it was a bad argument the moment I heard it but I just couldn't think of anything to rebut it when it happened. Happy Independence Day!

[@theutopianoutopioan464]

If you don't vote you can't complain? Then you may as well say if you vote you can't complain, because both are just as illogical! Wether you vote or not, you're still subject to the same statist system!

[@MobileGamingChronicles]

Precisely!

[@happydappyman]

Love the southpark episode where the boys have to vote between a literal giant douche and a turd sandwich. One of the main characters refuses to vote and after an entire episode of everyone trying to convince him of the importance of voting, he votes only for his candidate to loose in a landslide defeat rendering his vote ultimately useless. Edit: was his opinion any more valid for having voted? No. he just helped to legitimize the system he argued against.

[@DVSPress]

I did a demonstration with students a long time ago where they had to vote on what they were going to eat, and I gave them choices like liver and onions and balut, but the catch was everyone had to eat the same thing. When I forced everyone to vote, the outcome was different, and actually produced a greater degree of unhappiness with the outcome. The reason was those who had no preference chose randomly, and those who actually liked balut had to eat something they hated; everyone except one person in the room hated the outcome when I forced everyone to vote.

[@JimGiant]

I love the food analogy at the end. I remember the first time I heard this argument, I was shocked at the level of stupidity.

[@skyhook6540]

Thank you so much David! It's about time someone intelligently refuted this non-argument! 😄👍

[@jonathanc4166]

I wish I could share this on social media. My phone won't give me option for some reason. It's very well said and spot on.

[@MrKornnugget]

Your arguments are 100 percent valid. I think the point of the statement is to try to keep people involved in the system. If people are voting they are more likely to research the issues. Also you can vote for any person you want like yourself. The real point is to get people involved with the political process or it breaks down. The higher the turnout the more likely the political system is healthy.

[@unicornonthecob4302]

There are plenty of people who _don't_ think the political system is healthy though, not because the wrong people are in power, but because the whole system is corrupt by nature. A lot of those people don't vote because they don't want democracy in the first place, because democracy is nothing but mob rule. The reason you stated in support of voting- to keep the political process from breaking down, is really the best argument _against_ voting.

[@MrKornnugget]

This is not an argument against your position and I am not an expert, but here is my two cents about the "system" I agree that democracy is mob rule, but the United States is not truly a democracy. It is Constitutional Federal Republic with "Representative Democracy". The Representative part separates the Mob from the rule. I have traveled and lived around the world and have yet to see a better system. The problem with power is that if it is all paced with the people (mob) or a monarchy or a congress or the judicial branch; it always seems to harbor corruption and ultimately fails. I truly believe that the founding fathers saw this through history and tried to divide the power among conflicting and competing groups to ensure one branch or pillar of government does not get too powerful. The problem with not being involved with the process, not running for offices or voting, is it allows political parties to collude and bypass the separation of powers in the government. The best way to fight this is to run for local office and ensure State and local sovereignty and fight against the Federalization of our country. Fight the system by using the system to fight it's self. That is how it was designed. I hope that makes some sense, as I said I a not an expert, but I am a patriot and love this country.

[@crumplepoint2712]

Damn, this was fantastic! That was like a debate/philosophy handy reference or crash course. The "can't complain" and "voted" for the other guy are SO fallacious that they actually sound like jokes and can indeed be good jokes.

[@killersmirk8163]

"Manipulative Avoiders of Truth" A great band name.

[@ragnarrok257]

You never get to complain David. Unless there are fascists. Who are apparently everywhere and running everything. So you always get to complain. But just about the fascists. Haven't you learned anything from progressivism?

[@DVSPress]

Good 'ol fascism.

[@brickercustom]

David Stewart, I've hard people say, "If you vote you can't complain" what are your thoughts on said statement?

[@Stormkrow280]

Voting by It’s very nature is a show of support, if you vote for someone you are showing support for ALL of their future actions good or bad, therefore you have no right to complain about the outcome that occurs because you supported them in the first place.

[@Ghost_Of_SAS]

A very effective rebuttal to that nonsensical fallacy is that when you cast a vote for someone, you are morally responsible for what they do in office down the line, which is why you should only vote for someone who represents you in at least 70% of your key sociopolitical stances. Settling for less is viable, but irresponsible.

[@OptimusNiaa]

Except you then need to establish the truth of the claim that voting for someone makes a person morally responsible for what he/she does in the office.

[@gallendugall8913]

Actually in a few states they now allow prisoners to vote. 75,000 or so in the last presidential election. Anywho... The argument that voting grants you authority to speak about politics is as disjointed as declaring that people shouldn't talk about the military if they haven't served. It's true that a lot of people have wild misconceptions about military service, but serving in the military doesn't automatically grant you special insight into military matters. Voting doesn't grant you any special insight into political matters.

[@MrXMysteriousX]

I've always taken the statement to mean "get involved with politics" rather than it being an actual statement used to say you physically can't complain.

[@DVSPress]

I see it used all the time to avoid engaging with other people's points. It's also a non-argument for inspiring political action, as it, again, doesn't interact with truth on any level.

[@startechcode]

Well if you don't stand for something you will fall for anything!

[@MartinPHellwig]

I agree in general with your rebutal, however I have and continue to use the phrase if the "complaint" is something in the line of: "Party X is always worse than Party Z, I don't know why anyone would want to vote for them." and the complainer did not take any effort into voting according to their opinions. In my environment, by far the majority of loud complainers are doing exactly that and thus this phrase is IMO warranted. I know you didn't argue that this 'sophistry' is never valid but in case you did mean that or someone might conclude that, I just wanted to mention it. Cheers and thank you for your videos.

[@racewiththefalcons1]

"You can't complain" is the last bastion of those who have no argument for their chosen side. What if a mutual terribleness pervades both sides? Both parties warmonger and favor bribe money from banks and insurance companies over the needs of everyday people. Can I not complain about warmongering because I abstained from helping elect a warmonger? Can I only complain about warmongering if I help elect a candidate who has never opposed military intervention? That doesn't make any logical sense.

[@j.87558]

Great video. I'm guilty of this. I got mad from hearing the old "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain" and so I proceeded to twist it around, much like George Carlin: "If you did vote, you have no right to complain". It made sense to me because, if you vote, you basically accept the results of the democratic system as such: even if you lose, you participated in the system of voting according to its premisses. If you don't vote, you get to complain about the system of voting, and the parties therein, right? But I guess my ego is trying to use the same weapon as the sophist in this case. Your argument made me think, thank you.

[@samwallaceart288]

The reason I didn't vote is that I live overseas; now being American, I *can* vote on the final Presidential election, but to my knowledge I can't participate in any caucuses which choose *who* is being nominated to begin with. By the time it was getting to stuff where international citizens could actually participate all the sane candidates were already long-gone. But watching the various campaign trails, it seems like the caucuses and debates were horribly managed in 2016, decent candidates were getting no publicity, debate-moderators were specifically shutting down people like Rubio to give Trump more time to spout his rhetoric; to use the parlance of the time, it's disgusting and shameful. Hopefully things are far better over there than they appear from the international point of view.

[@unicornonthecob4302]

David, what are your thoughts on ethno-nationalism and white genocide?

[@DVSPress]

Most countries in the world today are ethnostates. Japan is an ethnostate. Israel is an ethnostate. I have no problem with ethnostates as a concept, and think they function better than multi-ethnic societies would in most places in the world. That being said, it is not appropriate for the USA for many reasons, the main one being we have too many ethnicity and "White" is not a true ethnicity - something like being Breton of Frisian would be a real ethnicity. We also formed the country with three races present - European, African, and Aboriginal North American. As a result, the American system of government needs to be separated from race and ethnicity, and as a result, most aspects of culture. As for "white genocide" like what Varg talks about, I don't think what is happening in Europe is the result of a intentional genocidal policies, more a misguided belief by modern social Marxists that European culture is meaningless or bad.

[@ajg8600]

If you were given the oppertunity to make a decision and refused to do so, you cannot complain when someone else makes the decision for you. End of story. I dont care if its technically a fallacy, quit whining and vote.

[@thedude-jb7wx]

First off George Carlin wasnt joking then my old man who born in the 30s didnt want me to join the military. He had believed with OBRA and things that happened under Reagan that America wasnt what he fought for. George Carlin said it done i have every right to complain i didnt cause this mess hahahahaha. I will complain if theres something wrong and wow is there a lot wrong with America.

[@ukchristian28]

I don't think people are saying that people who don't vote are not entitled to an opinion, or that their position is auotmatically incorrect due to their not voting. I think it is more that they don't have any entitlement to complain about the result, when they did nothing to avert it. Over here in the UK, a large percentage of 18-24 year olds didn't bother voting in the EU referendum. Most of them favoured remain, and if they had bothered voting, they might very well have changed the outcome. If they are going to start bitching and moaning about it, my response is going to be, "Well, sorry but I have no sympathy for you. You should have taken the 5 minutes it takes to register to vote online and then dragged yourself out of bed and gone down to the polling station on polling day. Perhaps it would have been different if you had." But that's not the same as saying their political opinions are invalid because they didn't vote.

[@Maxthepal]

I partly agree, and partly disagree. I think you can complain about "the system" and the person in power, but you are also partly responsible by not voting in the result of the election. Why not go and vote if you are choosing a future leader? That is the most important question. A leader will be chosen. You may not agree with everything that person stands for, but you really do have to make a choice, as the election will have a result whether you participated in it or not. If you don't vote it is you saying you don't care about the result "both options are bad so I'll stay home and complain". If everyone did that there would be no leader, which is something that will never happen. No leader is perfect. Everyone has flaws (some more than others). Leader is nonetheless always necessary. You can still complain yes, but I do think you still should have voted. Also if you vote someone in and you don't like that person after he gets in, yes you can criticize that person even in that case. You don't have to stand for everything that person says.

[@CharityDiary]

Very interesting video! I agree that it's a non-argument, but I'd say that it's one's *responsibility* (in presidential elections at least) to learn everything one can about the top two candidates and choose which will benefit the country the most. I guess I'd consider "Neither choice is ideal for me, so I'm just not going to participate" to be a sort of "non-argument" as well. In your wedding reception analogy, it would be like knowing exactly what both meals are going to be in advance, but refusing to choose the one you'd like more. And don't get me started on people who vote for third parties who have no chance of winning in presidential elections. I'm sure they're being morons but haven't quite formulated the argument as to why yet.

[@DVSPress]

I addressed most of that around election time. Good points though.

[@tbrowntracyj]

the issue is not who won the vote but why they believe we are stupid enough to let someone treat us in a manner they do not want to be treated most people requardless of politics have a need for sincerity candor and honest so why complain about which liar won?

[@melyndahoffman8145]

I want to be your bff

[@treizTUBE]

I have never heard anyone use this as an argument, it is always used as a social repercussion to incentivize people to participate in the process. No one is going to forcibly stop you from complaining, you can stand facing a corner and complain all you want, but that isn't the point of complaining, which is a form of social engagement. You DO NOT have the right to force other people to engage with you socially, and the qualifications people can use to withhold their participation in discourse can be as arbitrary as they want them to be, including refusing to engage with people that were presumably too apathetic to participate in the political process. Exceptions for circumstances beyond the participants' control can be made at the individual's discretion.

[@DRourk]

With all due respect, calling a bad argument a non argument is itself a bad argument. To your credit, you did go on to make some decent arguments. Just please avoid the small minded bullshit that is: 'Not an Argument', you'll be better off for it, and your arguments will be stronger.

[@MrGeneralPB]

well... if you did not vote i do not want to hear your complaints about what the government does, if you did not find anyone to vote for, then it is your fault for not running for government...

[@DVSPress]

Still not an argument.

[@MrGeneralPB]

tough shit sherlock, you live in a democracy, if you want your voice heard, speak up, if you want to change anything, vote or run for goverment

[@MrGeneralPB]

it comes down to a very simple fact, if you did not do anything to change the system then that is your problem, crying about it to others is a waste of time and energy, it is not our problem that you did not do anything to change whatever you are complaining about,nor is it our task to pat you on the back and listen to your crying about things that you are responsible for not changing... not changing, that is the very premise of the argument, if you did not change anything, complaing about things not changing is at the very least insulting and unproductive to the rest of us

[@DVSPress]

Still no arguments.

[@MrGeneralPB]

if you have the ability to clean your dishes(vote), why should i care if your dishes are dirty(your issues)?