Does It Really Matter Who Wins the U.S. Election?

Every four years, millions of Americans head to the polls, placing their hopes and frustrations into the hands of political candidates. Have you ever wondered, does it truly matter who wins?

From the Anarcho-Capitalist perspective, one that focuses on individual freedom and limited government, the answer might surprise you.

The Problem Isn't Who "Wins", It's the System Itself

Thinkers like Albert Jay Nock, in his book Our Enemy, the State , argue that the real issue isn't about which party or politician is in charge. Instead, it's the power that the state holds over individuals. Elections merely perpetuate this system, one where a select few benefit at the expense of productive people. According to Nock, the state is inherently coercive, no matter who is at the helm.

Murray Rothbard, another influential thinker, emphasizes in Anatomy of the State that the state thrives on aggression and exploitation. Changing leadership doesn’t change this fundamental truth. No matter who wins an election, the state’s predatory nature remains intact.

Freedom Doesn’t Come from Government, Ever

Ludwig von Mises, in his classic work Human Action , reminds us that individual freedom and economic prosperity are driven by voluntary interactions in the free market, not by government decisions. Elections and government actions often create more restrictions, limiting the potential for true individual freedom.

The Bigger Question: Why Does the State Have So Much Perceived Power?

In the end, it’s not about which politician wins an election, but rather why the government holds so much power in the first place. Anarcho-Capitalism, Voluntaryism, and free markets show that individuals flourish when their interactions are based on voluntary agreements, not government coercion.

So, does it really matter who wins the U.S. election? From my perspective, the answer is no. What matters is stepping outside of a system built on coercion, and toward a new way of thinking.