Why I believe in mandatory voting

[Mithrae]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

 

[Frank Apisa]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

Our voting system is already screwed up enough.

Why screw it up even more by making it mandatory?

If someone wants to vote...they vote.

If someone wants to live with whatever the rest decide is best...they don't go to the polls. In a sense, though, they have voted. They have voted to live with what the others decide.

 

[Crovax]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

The freedom to vote is also the freedom to choose not to. Mandatory voting is not freedom and shouldn't be supported by anyone who supports freedom.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

Voting doesn't equate to freedom, responsibility or aspiration.
I don't vote precisely because I do not think the people who vote are voting for responsibility, freedom, etc.

It's conform or be fined and you threw freedom in this talk?

 

[Van Basten]

Mandatory voting laws are an affront to human freedom and democracy.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

Two quick observations: 1) there is no way to logically put the words "freedom" and "mandatory" together, and 2) your narrative of "criminality in the US government" is not just inaccurate, but embarrassingly so.

 

[Mithrae]

The freedom to vote is also the freedom to choose not to. Mandatory voting is not freedom and shouldn't be supported by anyone who supports freedom.

Automobile speed limits are not freedom and shouldn't be supported by anyone who supports freedom.

Wow. That was a point I made in the OP. No, mandatory voting is not absolute freedom, but nor is voluntary voting. Either way, we are impacted by the decisions of other people. That can't be completely eliminated. But mandatory voting seeks to minimise the non-consentual aspect of it. Rather than three quarters of the population not consenting to a party's agenda - 60% not going to the polling booths and almost half the rest voting for the other side - requiring that everyone at least go to the polling booths ensures majority consent. More or less: Again, as noted in the OP, you're still free not to vote, even without copping a fine - just submit an empty ballot. (I'll admit voting systems are different around the world, but the concept of "none of the above" should not be difficult to include in any voting system!)

##

Voting doesn't equate to freedom, responsibility or aspiration.
I don't vote precisely because I do not think the people who vote are voting for responsibility, freedom, etc.

It's conform or be fined and you threw freedom in this talk?

Yes, because 'freedom' is the obvious and primary reason for objecting to mandatory voting; and it is a legitimate point of concern. But as with road rules, drug restrictions, workplace health and safety or any dozens of other examples, we're looking at a situation in which our freedom and wellbeing is going to be impacted regardless. That's an unavoidable aspect of living in a society. I believe that in this case participation and responsibility are better than apathy and ignorance; and given what a minor 'infringement' on freedom going to a local polling both every few years is, this like the other examples is the lesser of two evils.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Automobile speed limits are not freedom and shouldn't be supported by anyone who supports freedom.

Wow. That was a point I made in the OP. No, mandatory voting is not absolute freedom, but nor is voluntary voting. Either way, we are impacted by the decisions of other people. That can't be completely eliminated. But mandatory voting seeks to minimise the non-consentual aspect of it. Rather than three quarters of the population not consenting to a party's agenda - 60% not going to the polling booths and almost half the rest voting for the other side - requiring that everyone at least go to the polling booths ensures majority consent. More or less: Again, as noted in the OP, you're still free not to vote, even without copping a fine - just submit an empty ballot. (I'll admit voting systems are different around the world, but the concept of "none of the above" should not be difficult to include in any voting system!)

##



Yes, because 'freedom' is the obvious and primary reason for objecting to mandatory voting; and it is a legitimate point of concern. But as with road rules, drug restrictions, workplace health and safety or any dozens of other examples, we're looking at a situation in which our freedom and wellbeing is going to be impacted regardless. That's an unavoidable aspect of living in a society. I believe that in this case participation and responsibility are better than apathy and ignorance; and as minor an 'infringement' on freedom as going to a local polling both every few years is, this like the other examples is the lesser of two evils.

If you have your way, I'll just pay the fine and still not vote.
Again though, you're making a false equivocation that not voting = ignorance and irresponsibility.

Practically undermines your argument.

 

[Mithrae]

If you have your way, I'll just pay the fine and still not vote.
Again though, you're making a false equivocation that not voting = ignorance and irresponsibility.

Practically undermines your argument.

I said myself that I don't always vote, and cop fines for it. Maybe copping the fine more clearly expresses dissatisfaction with the available options even than a third party vote. Maybe not - in my case there's a bit of laziness in there too. But it surely says a bit more than simply doing nothing, with no consequences besides what everyone else votes in. You and I debate politics as a hobby, so we each presumably have some fairly strong and intelligent political views, yet we don't always vote: But how can anyone tell the difference between us and people who simply can't be bothered getting off their asses for half an hour? It's hardly an 'equivocation' which there's any grounds to complain about.

The second biggest objection to mandatory voting - after the freedom issue - is that it'll get all us nasty 'low-information' voters out there :lol: Often, as I'm sure we both recognise, that's political-speak for "people who probably won't vote for my party." But surely that's all the more reason to get the masses of dissatisfied voters out there voting for a third party?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I said myself that I don't always vote, and cop fines for it. Maybe copping the fine more clearly expresses dissatisfaction with the available options even than a third party vote. Maybe not - in my case there's a bit of laziness in there too. But it surely says a bit more than simply doing nothing, with no consequences besides what everyone else votes in. You and I debate politics as a hobby, so we each presumably have some fairly strong and intelligent political views, yet we don't always vote: But how can anyone tell the difference between us and people who simply can't be bothered getting off their asses for half an hour? It's hardly an 'equivocation' which there's any grounds to complain about.

The second biggest objection to mandatory voting - after the freedom issue - is that it'll get all us nasty 'low-information' voters out there :lol: Often, as I'm sure we both recognise, that's political-speak for "people who probably won't vote for my party." But surely that's all the more reason to get the masses of dissatisfied voters out there voting for a third party?

I don't have a party, nor candidate to support.
Any vote is for something (usually many somethings) I wouldn't support.
People are comforted by lies and illusions, thus it's not worth it to vote.

 

[joG]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

Maybe you have a better example?

 

[Quag]

Dont vote? dont B***h.
Simple as that.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Dont vote? dont B***h.
Simple as that.

A stupid, pedestrian meme, devoid of any thought.
Voted, don't bitch, you elected them.

 

[lb_on_teh_cb]

"......I believe in mandatory voting"

i believe in Freedom

 

[Quag]

A stupid, pedestrian meme, devoid of any thought.
Voted, don't bitch, you elected them.

Not, necessarily if the people you voted for didnt win you didnt elect them

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Not, necessarily if the people you voted for didnt win you didnt elect them

Sorry, you gave consent by participating.
You're still responsible.

 

[countryboy]

Let's be clear here: A mandatory vote doesn't mean voting for a party. You can throw in a donkey ballot if you feel the urge. Might be more productive to vote for a third party, of course.

Even then, there've been some Aussie elections that I haven't voted in, and I've copped some small fines for it: Just as I would if I drove too fast on a highway. Maintaining freedom from others' stupid decisions is not always free.

But I believe that people - even those sometimes derided as 'ignorant' or 'low-information voters' - should feel their appropriate share of responsibility for the actions of their government. "Don't blame me, I didn't vote" is never an excuse.



What's prompted this is a couple of recent threads reminding me of criminality in the US government: In 2003 a United States government invaded another sovereign nation on the opposite side of the world on the flimsiest of pretexts, in the face of overwhelming international opposition and without the required UN Security Council authorization. There were many civilian casualties and (as we have since seen, despite BHO's extension of GWB's withdrawal schedule) a much greater destabilization of the region than previously, as some had predicted would be the case.

And yet George W. Bush was re-elected.

By a minority of Americans, of course. There's no telling what would have happened if mandatory voting had ensured a 95+% turnout. But it would be nice to think that even those Americans who see little substantial difference in their parties' domestic policies might at least - if they had to - come to terms with their country's international role!

The same point applies to all countries, of course. A democratic government is our government. I believe any country interested in that ideal should encourage the aspiration rather than the apathy, and the responsibility rather than the ignorance.

Who cares why people believe in stupid ****? :shrug:

 

[Quag]

Sorry, you gave consent by participating.
You're still responsible.

Disagree you showed that you were against the choice of people elected, if that is how it turns out.
Even if you voted those who won, if (when) they dont do as they said they would do, you also have the right to B****.
However if they do as they said then no you shouldnt b****.

 

[Mithrae]

Dont vote? dont B***h.
Simple as that.

Of course, as I illustrated in the OP, that's not much comfort for folk in other countries who are affected by the actions of foreign governments.

Australia also participated in the illegal invasion of Iraq; and Australia also re-elected the criminal politician. It can be safely said that most Australians, or close to it at least, share in that disgrace. Do Americans? Did Americans deserve praise for their involvement in WW2? Assigning blame or praise for a government's international activities is probably the least of the reasons for supporting mandatory voting, but the fact that governments invariably do affect others who have no say at all in the matter is a decent reason to view blase attitudes with disdain.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Disagree you showed that you were against the choice of people elected, if that is how it turns out.
Even if you voted those who won, if (when) they dont do as they said they would do, you also have the right to B****.
However if they do as they said then no you shouldnt b****.

And why not?
Why shouldn't someone bitch, if they don't like any of the candidates?

 

[Quag]

Of course, as I illustrated in the OP, that's not much comfort for folk in other countries who are affected by the actions of foreign governments.

Australia also participated in the illegal invasion of Iraq; and Australia also re-elected the criminal politician. It can be safely said that most Australians, or close to it at least, share in that disgrace. Do Americans? Did Americans deserve praise for their involvement in WW2? Assigning blame or praise for a government's international activities is probably the least of the reasons for supporting mandatory voting, but the fact that governments invariably do affect others who have no say at all in the matter is a decent reason to view blase attitudes with disdain.

No clue where you are trying to go with this

 

[Quag]

And why not?
Why shouldn't someone bitch, if they don't like any of the candidates?

Sure they can, just go spoil your ballot. If enough people spoil their ballots the politicians will start to think hmm what can we do to get them to vote for us. If they just dont vote the politicians will think, meh they dont count we can ignore them.

 

[Mithrae]

And why not?
Why shouldn't someone bitch, if they don't like any of the candidates?

I've gotta side with Quag on this: Opposing bad candidates is far better than doing nothing at all.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Of course, as I illustrated in the OP, that's not much comfort for folk in other countries who are affected by the actions of foreign governments.

Australia also participated in the illegal invasion of Iraq; and Australia also re-elected the criminal politician. It can be safely said that most Australians, or close to it at least, share in that disgrace. Do Americans? Did Americans deserve praise for their involvement in WW2? Assigning blame or praise for a government's international activities is probably the least of the reasons for supporting mandatory voting, but the fact that governments invariably do affect others who have no say at all in the matter is a decent reason to view blase attitudes with disdain.

Of course there is no peace for them.
The sheer power and numbers of people who, get their information from news bits, trite bits of "common sense" and other poor sources of information, outnumber the people of conscience, the reasonable folks, those that do deep research, self reflection and in depth evaluation.
To the point that not voting, is the most logical and economical reason.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I've gotta side with Quag on this: Opposing bad candidates is far better than doing nothing at all.

Voting is not opposing bad candidates.
Here, in some states, not writing in a valid write in candidate can have your whole vote invalidated.
Not to mention that voting roles are often used for jury duty, so there are two reasons to not bother.