The Spiteful Veto of the Minority

Ultimately the power of the minority in a Democracy comes out of spite; if the deal being offered to them is bad enough, their only real recourse is to engage in spiteful activity which hurts the majority. In order for this not to be a heckler's veto, in which any group can just mess things up until they get what they want, it has to hurt them, too; the price they pay has to be real. But if they're willing to pay the price for it - I think it behooves the majority to listen. Because that recourse doesn't go away, it just escalates; the worse you make things for somebody, the more they're willing to give up to hurt you.

That, ultimately, is the balancing factor against democracy as being nothing more than mob rule.

A group making a convincing case that they're all in for spite shouldn't be a call to arms against them, especially when the thing they are asking for is for things to stop being done to them.

So, this partly is a post about the Canadian convoy, which I’m increasingly sympathetic to, because if nothing else, the actions of the Canadian government, I believe, show that there is something to be fought there.

However, and this is a very large however - it is damned appropriate for the government to impose some kind of costs on the participants of the convoy, if for no other reason than the alternative is just another form of mob rule. The Spiteful Veto is an important part of Democracy, but it is must be a spiteful act to be valid. An action taken without expectation of cost simply does not count, and the majority can mount far more such actions (and I would argue, does).

Thus, the validity of a protest is, to some extent, measured by how harsh the response could have reasonably expected to be, and how harsh the response actually is. Mind, it’s possible to have a cruel authoritarian dictatorship that cunningly treats protestors with kid gloves, so the fact that a protest does not get a harsh response is not proof that it is not valid, but it does suggestively raise its eyebrows.

So I am not opposed to the convoy participants paying a price for their participation in the convoy, and, indeed, we should be suspicious of any protestors that pay no price at all for their protest, because they likely represent those in power, rather than those outside it; and be suspicious most of all of those who get what they want without paying any price at all for it. This is not about the BLM protests; the fact that the resultant riots often burn black businesses and neighborhoods is evidence for the validity of their claims, not evidence against them, making plain the price they are paying for protesting.

However, and this is an enormous however: The Canadian government is going after the employment, employability, and the finances, of those participating in the convoy. If you have ever protested poor treatment of workers, if you have ever described a situation as wage slavery, if you have ever fought for the rights of labor, if you have ever questioned class, if you have ever thought poorly of capitalism, if you have the slightest inkling of what leftist philosophy is about - you should fucking understand why this is unacceptable.

If you don’t meet any of those criteria, understand something very simple: Participation in the market system is mandatory. You don’t get to opt out of employment, you don’t get to opt out of money. What is being one is a revocation of what is, in our society, the right to exist.

That response is unacceptable. It is in many respects equivalent to pointing a gun at the head of those protesting, and those who would protest. Worse is the way corporations are participating with, and cheering this on; Twitter ignoring its own rules as those who donated to the convoy are doxxed on its platform; of course capitalism is interested in crushing a worker revolt. We have a word for the unholy merger of corporate and government interests.

Now, angry ranting aside, what does this mean, for the Spiteful Veto? Like shooting protestors, it is an escalation. It might stop the protest now, it might raise the price of the Veto - but it pushes the minority that much further towards paying a much higher price, for a much uglier, much more spiteful, response. Protests today become riots tomorrow. Riots today become civil war tomorrow.

Remember that the price you impose is the price of admission for the Spiteful Veto. But if you impose too high a price for what they get, you’re just putting it as a downpayment to future problems.