"---it is "always" a crime (it is force - it conflates prices - it causes boom-bust cycle - it destroys asset value)."
When you, alone, define the meaning of a word, then that is the only meaning of that word according to you?
A vote can be a customer buying something, voting with their purchase, and the concept of voting can be strictly voluntary, so when you narrow down the meaning of voting to be a synonym for crime, or a sub-set of crime, then why not just call it crime?
Why sugar coat crime with false fronts like the word "vote"?
I have my guesses.
"State-Authority was TYRANNICAL in the South -- the owner-class put taxes on the non-owner class by fiat; King Cotton was deep into Fractorage Debt (to Banks of England and France). They wanted slavery to expand westward. Secession meant the continuance of rape-sodomoy, forced abortion, sex trade, murder, selling off of one's family etc etc."
Tyrants, a subset of criminals, are tyrannical, "State-Authority" is a legal fiction, an idea, or a set of actions performed by a set of people, actual actions, actual people with names.
Why confuse the criminals with anything other than criminals?
I can guess, if you care not to answer for your own words.
"State-Authority is no different than National-Authority -- In fact you cannot have National-Authority without State-Authority; the further power is centralized away from the "local setting" the more impotent it is."
So, by your words, there is no other valid, competitive, viewpoint other than your own?
So what is the point of publishing your total authority over the subject being viewed?
"City-Authority might work -- it would be very easy to vote-with-your-feet."
Cities have no authority, if by "cities" the word means a Legal Fiction, or Corporation, or Place on Earth within a boundary marked on the ground, but if the work means the set of people within the city whereby those people think and act as authorities, then either their authority is authority or their authority is not authority.
What do you think "authority" means?
"Individualism (oddly and humorously) requires No-Authority."
You appear to be confusing authority with external control, or some other measurable occurrence, not authority if the word authority means something along the lines of the highest quality and lowest cost, or best, viewpoint.
The leader was leading the group because the leader commanded the higher quality and lowest cost, authoritative, and best, viewpoint as to how best to deal with the situation.
Not as in:
The criminal convinced the victims of a false belief in the criminals supposedly authority.
Why confuse crime with anything but crime?
I can still guess.
"How much of your value do you want to possess and control? The rest, the amount you don't want, goes to the state."
What do you think is a State - exactly?
Your words appear to attribute accountability to this thing you call a State, which is a very big part of the trouble that currently plagues the human species - each one.
I've been wrong often, but in this case it appears as if your viewpoint is full of holes.