The current buzz used as 'reason' for requiring photo ID in order to vote is tied - lock, stock & cookie cutter - to "preventing fraud" and/or "preventing terrorist influence". Both excuses are flatly insulting at best, and just plain ridiculous at worst.
(A) The "preventing fraud" argument assumes from the get-go that 'everyone' commits fraud, or will, given the least chance. Now THERE'S a sad commentary on the majority culture.. This argument assumes there is no such thing as honor or respect anymore, for anything, apparently. I don't buy that.
"Everyone" is most definitely NOT represented by the scum we read so much about in the headlines of late. I speak of those who should be role models, but who instead show up as object lessons.. doped-up sports figures, lying and/or thieving CEO's of corporations, televangelists & other majority-culture 'religious' figures, and so on.
As for the majority-culture religious figures who have dragged their sorry selves through all manner of muck in recent years.. there's no such thing as "all" of any group being only one way, so they aren't representative of religious figures, either. There never has been & there never will be; despite efforts to try to fit everyone into one category by this ridiculous photo ID law. "All" religious figures are not saints, NOR are they all fakes. Experience has taught me that the majority are devout and just plain humans.
(B) The "preventing terrorist influence" argument is so ridiculous & full of holes it shouldn't merit any discussion. Since so many others have commented on it, though, it appears another voice needs to be heard on the matter.
My argument on this premise is, if a picture of a person will prevent "terrorist influence" in voting, then why have votes been bought & sold in the majority culture before it came to this Turtle Island? There are pictures of Presidents involved, here, but if 'a picture' is all that's needed to prevent terrorist influence...
OH! Do I hear cries of outraged denial here? Again, quoting from my very full files of life experiences.. when I was a college student, working my way through university, my uncle - who was the local sheriff - came to my door one night with a hefty box full of things most self-supporting college kids would crawl naked over sharp rocks for - REAL food. Meat (we Indns eat LOTS of meat! yum, yum!); fresh fruits & vegetables.. and about $10 cash.
He told me he 'just wanted to encourage me in my studies'. As he turned, he said, "don't forget to vote.." & out the door he went. It took me about a minute to mull over how he meant that last remark; then I decided to test him, so opened the door & said, "Uncle Nick? I can't take your gift."
He looked at me with Big Eyes & said, "Why not?" I said, "It's a GREAT gift, but if I eat these things and buy gas to get to classes, and then I vote for you, I'll feel as if I might have been influenced by them when I vote. And if I don't vote for you, while you wouldn't know it, I'd feel as if I lied to you in taking them. So here.." and I handed him the box.
His eyes got slitty and he snarled at me, "That rag-heap car of yours will get so many citations from now on, you won't be able to pay the fines!" Then he threw the box in his car & left.
My car got pulled over so often for awhile, the deputies took to apologizing for it, and the judge finally made them stop. A photo ID wouldn't have done a blessed thing to stop my uncle from bringing his version of terrorist into my life. As is easily seen, 'terrorists' are definitely not all foreign-born, or of any other single caste.
I realize the argument might also have been made that there is a 'need' to keep track of us citizens. To that I reply mos emphatically, "NO! This is a FREE land. That includes the RIGHT, not the privilege, to move within it freely. That means, by definition, 'no tracking of the anyone's movements unless it has been PROVEN that a specific individual is a threat to others." There is no such thing as a free country where a non-convict doesn't have privacy of movement. ONLY in Totalitarian regimes is there a requirement to track individuals, because Totalitarian regimes (= police states) can only maintain their grasp of temporal power through terrorism; and that especially includes being able to track anyone anywhere anytime.
Moreover, since we Indigenous People are citizens of Sovereign Nations within the borders of what is commonly called the U.S., as well as citizens of the U.S., we have the Right to vote also, but not all Indn nations issue photo ID cards, despite "enrollment" - which was begun as a means to keep track of us.
My Nation issues a Letter of Blood Degree. No photo. Since the great majority of Indn Nations live in poverty similar to that of Third World Nations, 'thanks' to the bigoted perspectives of the majority culture and its bonehead government bureaucrats, we can't afford the equipment to produce photo IDs, even if we wanted them. Which the majority of us don't. We treasure our privacy. Thus Traditionally, we do not want our pictures taken, let alone 'shared' between agencies of the majority culture government. (You won't find a picture of me on my page. Likely, ever.)
The U.S. Constitution is, after all, over 85% from Indn documents and ways.. The words about 'land of the free' and 'privacy' came from us. This push for photo IDs flies in the face of such concepts.
In short, there is no true reason for requiring photo ID in order to vote. Here, if I am willing to assert who I am in an affidavit when I go to the polls, I am automatically assured that I can vote. Anything else is anti-Constitutional, insulting, and unnecessary.
Thank you for hearing me in a good way now.
No comments:
Post a Comment