It may be asked in connection with my argument against voting in the upcoming federal elections, “What if everyone thought like this? Wouldn’t our democracy be ruined?”
First, this “Kantian” argument would seem to demonstrate that there is a moral or at least civic duty to vote. I deny, however, on other grounds that there is such a duty. I am not bound by any “universal law” to participate in the democratic farce.
Second, suppose that our “democracy” is ruined indeed. So what? As I have suggested, “there is no viable method of governing large states.” Even if we end up with monarchy or aristocracy instead, very little will be lost.
Third, a clear and in my view, attractive regime on the federal level is none of these 3 traditional systems of government but simply anarchy. By not voting, I express my support for abolishing the federal government altogether. If then it is a good thing for democracy to be ruined, then the argument fails.
Finally, the essence of democratic elections is that “the people rule.” But who do they rule? They collectively rule individuals. But maybe they shouldn’t rule anyone. I certainly would not presume to do so.
Maybe individuals should be able to live free, under laissez-faire. I have no interest in political power, even as illusory as the voting franchise. If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve; and to add to these, if granted a power to coerce others with my vote, I will throw it away.
Note that voting against various local evils like tax levies is a bit more rational.