Voting is for Violence against Minorities

The whole point of majority voting is to force a minority of people to do something against its will. Take Obamacare for example. The majority think I should buy health insurance, but I don't want it. So their solution is to force me by majority vote into buying it in order to "help me". Nearly everyone I've ever met outside of the Libertarian / Free State Project crowd is okay with this and thinks its wonderful. I don't get it. How is it that people feel good doing that?

If it is wrong for one person do a thing, it is also wrong for a group of people to do the exact same thing.

People seem to selectively abandon their "majority wins" principle whenever it suits them, and they still think they have some sort of moral values. For example, when the US Southern states voted to succeed from the USA, that should prevented by force even with 100% majority vote. Yet other votes the standard is 50%.

The full tyranny of the situation is revealed at the local level. 100% of a vote for a local area to not do what the political region wants results in a rejection of the vote. If they local area insists on doing what it is they don't have permission to do regardless of the local support level, the region will literally kill them if necessary. And the outsiders actually feel just fine about killing them... like they are doing the world a favor by killing.

Majority rule is ultimately all about violence against minorities. People should not feel good about voting except for defensive voting... voting against such things.

It wasnt exactly where I thought you were going with this.
You explained it well and I get it and you are correct for the most part.
Im drifting more and more towards States Rights. If the states were given
more rights to self determin their own directioin people could find a place to live
that suits their lifestyle best. Vote for States Rights whenever given that opportunity.

and what is the alternative?

a reply to: SaturnFX
I would advocate a strange idea I call "Democracy". In this Democracy, if you see a problem, you band together with people who also see the problem and then fix it. Instead of passing the buck to some corrupt stranger pretending to represent you, to do the dirty work for you.

Instead of having unsafe food because the USDA doesn't actually work, we could have safe food. Instead of having unsafe drugs because the FDA is nothing more than a for-profit arm of multi-billion dollar drug manufacturers to keep competition away, we could have drugs that are safe and legal. Its almost as if we would have a government instead of today's chaotic system based on ideas that simply don't work in real life.

The only organization I'd trust to tell me whether a certain food is safe is Consumers Lab. Not the FDA, but Consumers Lab. Consumers Lab does more good than the FDA but they don't actually force anyone who isn't interested in their services to buy them against their will. As an added bonus, Consumer's Lab runs for millions of dollars instead of hundreds of billions, which is a nice savings.

The most common use of voting is nothing more than a way of shedding responsibility for your actions that would otherwise be illegal. So, normally I can't take $2,000 from my next door neighbor because I'd like to send my kids to school. But I can accomplish that by voting and for whatever reason I'm not punished and instead people compliment me for doing my civic duty even though all I really did was commit a crime. So, a step I would take is make people responsible legally responsible for their votes as if they did these things them self. In the same way an employer is responsible for his employees, a voter should be responsible for actions of his or her votes. In this way, voting can continue, no problems. Voting should continue, but only in ways that do not use violence against minorities.