They did not vote against their own interests. They voted for their interests in the only choice available that claimed to represent their interests. The point is the voters don't have an actual choice and never did, most of the consent is manufactured. The ultimate point I guess is that liberal democracy, which often does not represent mass opinion is becoming more direct and the system does not really support that sort of decision making because only people like Trump can get up there to be voted for, demagogues. The elite now don't know how to put the genie back in the bottle. This article is crying out HALP!
majority of ppl voted for some party, a party that gave consent to place/allow billboards, so indirectly, you gave consent. In the graffity's case - even the ruling party didn't gave consent, it's that they don't have resources to penalize and clean this mess
It's in the same category of "insane choices voted-in by duly-elected representatives that will somehow still manage to persuade the electorate to vote against their own common sense".
Don't forget the voters who elected them. Do you see the voters running to the polls and voting for someone else when crap like this gets passed? Of course not. Therefore, the voters implicitly consent to it.
reply