Should The Sheep Vote for The Lesser of Two Evils?

It was election year yet again, and a new sheep appeared in the horizon. Sheep of monstrous integrity, who were committed to the high ideals of a true democracy. Which is that in an election: May the best candidate win.

The two candidates up for election were two bickering foxes. The sheep understood all too well that neither fox was committed to their wellbeing. Sheep understood that foxes were at war with sheep. In fact, sheep knew that the two foxes up for president were interested in the very idea of having the sheep, and any sheep for that matter for dinner.

And so the democratic sheep was stooped in a terrifying dilemma. Sheep thought to themselves, which fox should they choose? Other democracy-living sheep, paid for by the foxes, run to the rescue of the other undecided sheep, imploring all sheep to choose what they, the democracy-loving sheep, had come to call The Lesser.

What is The Lesser? The Lesser simply meant, choosing the candidate, i.e. which of the two foxes, will do the lesser harm to all sheep. And so the word lesser came out of the operational phrasing for the election of a fox as president. All democratic sheep had to choose the Lesser fox of the two evils.

And so the election came and went. The democratic sheep voted for the grey fox, over the white fox. The grey fox had promised to eat only sheep’s toes, while the white fox had promised to eat whole sheep legs. Obviously, the democratic sheep would rather part with their toes than whole legs.

Years passed, and another election was at hand. Two foxes were up for elections again. The democratic sheep voted for the pale fox who promised to eat only half of sheep’s legs over the white fox who had promised its supporters that it will guarantee whole sheep legs for dinner.

Years passed, and another election was at hand. Yet again, two foxes were up for president. The democratic sheep voted for the grey sheep who only wanted the remaining half of the sheep’s legs for its supports, while the white fox promised its supports whole sheep legs for dinner. The democratic sheep reasoned and satisfied themselves with the idea that they had made the choice for the lesser of two evils.

Years passed. And elections came and went. The democratic sheep voted for the fox who promised lesser harm to all sheep. And so while the foxes remained stronger and grew stronger, the sheep got weaker and weaker, losing one limb or another to the next fox president until they were left with no limbs to show.

Tired, exhausted, and frustrated, and unable to walk and search for their own food, the sheep became very hungry. There was now famine, and starvation among sheep—not for the lack of food, but for their inability to look for and get the food. The democratic sheep grew weaker and weaker, since each election year the sheep became less and less likely to change the harm that was being done to them by the foxes.

Sheep were only able to eat by rolling around their torsos to obtain fresher pastures. Of course, this method of locomotion was dangerous. Many democratic sheep lost their lives simply because they could not walk, in addition to those democratic sheep which lost their lives as a result of complications from losing their limbs to foxes.

Another election came. And still several democratic sheep—despite losing all their limbs to the lesser of two evil foxes—maintained that democratic sheep vote for the lesser of two evils. The grey fox, who now had promised to drink sheep blood from the buttocks of sheep, one cup a month, versus the white fox who had promised its supporters that sheep’s heads were guaranteed for dinner.

Stuck between the choice of voting for a fox who wanted to decapitate sheep and the fox who guaranteed blood-letting-sipping of sheep blood at all fox dinner tables, the democratic sheep were left with no choice: Blood-letting from the buttocks by the foxes.

Until one fox screamed at the top of its lungs: You know folks, you don’t have to legitimize the fox genocide against you. You don’t have to vote. Not voting too, is a choice, to delegitimize the established infrastructure that preys on us. Not voting is non-participation in our own murder. Not voting is telling the fox: No you don’t have any right to take our limbs, drink our blood or decapitate us. Not voting is our only refuge. It is the most important step for our defiance against fox terrorism. Not voting is our defiance against our demise.

All the democratic sheep fell silent, realizing that they had participated in a system, called democracy, which fundamentally, technically and wholly entailed the fox deciding which part of the sheep they would have for dinner until the fox had finally killed and ate all the sheep. The democratic sheep were flabbergasted by their own realization.

Yet, the very thought of this trauma caused some sheep to fall asleep. Though the air remained putrid with the stench of sheep death. Alas, many democratic sheep awoke and still maintained that the only choice there was—“obviously” they said—was to vote for the lesser of two evils: That is, vote for the grey fox who had promised its fox supporters the constant flow of sheep blood at their dinner tables instead of vote for the fox who was ready to chop off sheep heads for dinner.

Should The Sheep Vote for The Lesser of Two Evils

Previous articleWhat Is A Jungle?
Next articleWhat is Racial Progress or CHANGE In America?
Amenuti Narmer
~ Success is a horrible teacher. It seduces the ignorant into thinking that he can’t lose. It seduces the intellectual into thinking that he must win. Success corrupts; Only usefulness exalts. ~ WP. Narmer Amenuti (which names translate: Dances With Lions), was born by The River, deep within the heartlands of Ghana, in Ntoaboma. He is a public intellectual from the Sankoré School of Critical Theory, where he trained and was awarded the highest degree of Warrior Philosopher at the Temple of Narmer. As a Culture Critic and a Guan Rhythmmaker, he is a dilettante, a dissident and a gadfly, and he eschews promotional intellectualism. He maintains strict anonymity and invites intellectuals and lay people alike to honest debate. He reads every comment. If you find his essays delightful, and you want to support the creation of more content like this, find Narmer's information below: CashApp: $Narmer3100

1 COMMENT

  1. Spot on allegory or democracy. The word lesser may fool some people to believe there is a silver lining but harm is harmful. It is definitely best not to condone harm done into oneself and the community. Sheep should definitely not vote.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.