Originally posted by lordhighgusYour system works possibly because you're in a tiny country population-wise. The vote in California alone would landslide any vote in your country. I agree our system is wrong, and something has to be done, but forcing someone to vote doesn't sound feasible to me.
There were 10 candidates in my electorate alone.
Compulsory voting means that the country is not ruled by the party who gets 18 percent of the primary vote (unlike George W).
2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeI do not vote in any elections in which I am allowed, Presidential or otherwise, because:
We know that approximately 50% of the people who are allowed to vote do not go and vote in the US presidential elections.
I wonder what the reasons are for them not to vote. Some say that these people are not interested in politics. Well, this is true of course for a certain percentage, but there must be more reasons and above all more interesting and mo om and true democracy, is it ?
Maybe you do not vote also. Can you give us the reasons ?
1. There are numerous voting systems which could be used in an election, and it is not clear that any one is better than the others. I'm thus unconvinced that the result of implementing any one of them provides a sensible way of determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem);
2. I'm unconvinced that determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions is a sensible way to run a society;
3. I've not been eligible to vote in very many elections, and have yet to be interested in the issues of any of the referenda or particularly impressed with any candidate. 2008 will be the first Presidential election I'm eligible to vote in, but I doubt I will;
4. Party politics dominates major American elections, and I think it's atrociously silly;
5. I don't live in the constituency in which I'm eligible to register to vote.
6. I'm not convinced that the voting system which has been chosen is implemented fairly.
Originally posted by jammerWhich of the reasons for not voting that I listed above suffices to make my rights different from those of other people?
People don't vote (in the USA) mostly because they don't think their vote matters.
What's not mentioned is that a non-vote is a vote for whoever wins.
I vote just to keep my bitching rights .. if you don't vote, you have to give them up IMHO.
Originally posted by ChronicLeakyI have no idea, can't tell what Country you're talking about.
Which of the reasons for not voting that I listed above suffices to make my rights different from those of other people?
You don't claim a Country in your profile, so I assume you're not too proud of where you live.
You'll find senior citizens in the USA who've never voted there whole lives. Lots of people opt out of "the system." I like that .. it makes my vote all the stronger.
Originally posted by SmookiePYou're not really forcing people to vote, in any system I know of where there is 'compulsory voting'.
Your system works possibly because you're in a tiny country population-wise. The vote in California alone would landslide any vote in your country. I agree our system is wrong, and something has to be done, but forcing someone to vote doesn't sound feasible to me.
All that is really happening is that people are being compelled to go through the process of voting (or pay a fine, usually minimal). If they don't agree with any of the parties, they can still spoil their ballot paper.
In the UK, spoilt papers are the only ones the candidates actually see. Some of them are quite funny.
Originally posted by jammerNot only did one of my reasons for not voting deal specifically with the country in which I can vote, but some of the reasons did not apply to one country, so why do their moral consequences differ from place to place?
I have no idea, can't tell what Country you're talking about.
You don't claim a Country in your profile, so I assume you're not too proud of where you live.
You'll find senior citizens in the USA who've never voted there whole lives. Lots of people opt out of "the system." I like that .. it makes my vote all the stronger.
Originally posted by lordhighgusI personally dislike the idea of having mandatory voting because it takes away the right assoicated with voting. Sure, you still have freedom of choice in who to vote for, but you should still have freedom of choice in whether or not to vote. I think people should vote out of interest, concern, etc., not out of compulsion.
In the state of New South Wales where i live in Australia, we just had our state elections.
Voting is compulsory here, backed by a fine of $100.00 AUD. Personally i think it is a good idea as it makes all citizens have a say in the governance of our society at both state and federal levels. If you dont like the scumbags in power, vote them out and get n ...[text shortened]... are no guys with machine guns or weapons around trying to influence my vote.
Long may it be so.
Originally posted by ChronicLeakyNo, it didn't .. and you still don't SPECIFICALLY say what Country you're going on about.
Not only did one of my reasons for not voting deal specifically with the country in which I can vote, but some of the reasons did not apply to one country, so why do their moral consequences differ from place to place?
I'll assume it's the US you're talking 'bout and try to answer your questions.
............................
"1. There are numerous voting systems which could be used in an election, and it is not clear that any one is better than the others. I'm thus unconvinced that the result of implementing any one of them provides a sensible way of determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow%27s_impossibility_theorem);"
You're not convinced the system works, so you opt out.
I love this .. it makes my vote stronger.
You get to sit on the ivory tower and point out that you're above any responsiblity .. I get to elect the people I want.
.............................
"2. I'm unconvinced that determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions is a sensible way to run a society;"
I'm not here to sway you to vote. I'm the one who's glad you don't.
.........................................
"3. I've not been eligible to vote in very many elections, and have yet to be interested in the issues of any of the referenda or particularly impressed with any candidate. 2008 will be the first Presidential election I'm eligible to vote in, but I doubt I will;"
Thank you for not voting, please continue.
........................................
"4. Party politics dominates major American elections, and I think it's atrociously silly;"
Good reasoning .. don't vote.
..........................................
"5. I don't live in the constituency in which I'm eligible to register to vote."
Stay where you are, don't move.
.................................
"6. I'm not convinced that the voting system which has been chosen is implemented fairly."
I see you've been paying attention in school.
Above all .. life should be "fair" .. if you find something that's not, then stand back and refuse to be part of it.
Thank God for the American school system
Originally posted by jammerNo, it didn't .. and you still don't SPECIFICALLY say what Country you're going on about.
Suppose I am eligible to vote in a country other than the US. If the presence of party politics in American election is a reason for me not to vote, then this is a bad reason, provided I am not using the broader meaning of "American" (ie "North American"😉. This aside, I am eligible to vote in the US only.
You're not convinced the system works, so you opt out.
I love this .. it makes my vote stronger.
You get to sit on the ivory tower and point out that you're above any responsiblity .. I get to elect the people I want.
Did you read and understand the piece on Arrow's impossibility theorem? Given that no voting system in an election involving more than two candidates can possibly accomplish what it sets out to do to some very reasonable standard, why do you tacitly support the arbitrary selection of a voting system by participating? The default state of humanity is not voting. To vote is to take an action, which should be justified.
Your vote does constitute a marginally larger percentage of the pool, given my non-voting, than it would if I voted, but so does everyone else's. Thus your vote is only made "stronger" in real terms if you're sure I would have voted in opposition to you.
You do not get to "elect the people you want". You get to express your preference for the people you want (if that is the voting strategy you choose to follow; some vote to express disapproval of those they don't want). You get to do this in a very limited and arbitrary chosen (unless only two people run and there are no write-ins, see Arrow) way, and you are responsible for helping to perpetuate this state of affairs, in an equally limited way.
How does having read about Arrow put me in an "ivory tower"? Why shouldn't I point out the fact that I am above responsibility, given that I was asked by the original poster?
I'm not here to sway you to vote. I'm the one who's glad you don't.
Why did you reply to my post, in that case? What convinces you, if anything, that determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions is the best way to run a society? Fairness?
Stay where you are, don't move.
Maybe I'll move to your constituency and start voting. However, none of the local issues in the place where I am legally resident affect me, given that I don't live there. Do you agree it would be disingenuous to vote in local elections?
I see you've been paying attention in school.
Above all .. life should be "fair" .. if you find something that's not, then stand back and refuse to be part of it.
Thank God for the American school system
What does this even mean? There is enormous evidence, which you can look up yourself, to the effect that there have been systematic efforts to implement the chosen voting system in a way not specified by the law in recent elections (specifically Presidential ones). Thus the voter cannot even be as sure as you seem to be that xyr vote carries any weight at all -- it may not have even been counted. By voting, one thus participates in the disenfranchisement of others.
I made no claims that "life should be fair". However, social systems which are explicitly designed to give equal voice to everyone should do so, if possible, and American elections don't; in fact, given Arrow's theorem, most elections can't.
Originally posted by RedmikeThats more along the lines of what i was trying to say.
You're not really forcing people to vote, in any system I know of where there is 'compulsory voting'.
All that is really happening is that people are being compelled to go through the process of voting (or pay a fine, usually minimal). If they don't agree with any of the parties, they can still spoil their ballot paper.
In the UK, spoilt papers are the only ones the candidates actually see. Some of them are quite funny.
Its called the Westminster system of government and i think it makes for pretty stable democracies.
We all should vote, as in some other places you are denied this simple right. You may only think, "oh , there's only one of me, what can my vote do?"
What your vote does is to keep the buggers honest. They gotta work for it!
Originally posted by wittywonkaI think people should vote out of interest, concern, etc., not out of compulsion too, but it doesnt happen. The alternative is risking half or under of the people voting, and getting a government voted in by 25% or less of the people.
I personally dislike the idea of having mandatory voting because it takes away the right assoicated with voting. Sure, you still have freedom of choice in who to vote for, but you should still have freedom of choice in whether or not to vote. I think people should vote out of interest, concern, etc., not out of compulsion.
That seems to me to be ripe for corruption.
You have to keep the buggers honest.
Originally posted by ChronicLeakyDidn't read anything about any Arrow's impossibility theorem and my 1st post here was in response to the OP not you.
[b]No, it didn't .. and you still don't SPECIFICALLY say what Country you're going on about.
Suppose I am eligible to vote in a country other than the US. If the presence of party politics in American election is a reason for me not to vote, then this is a bad reason, provided I am not using the broader meaning of "American" (ie "North American" ...[text shortened]... don't; in fact, given Arrow's theorem, most elections can't.[/b]
I vote and support the American system because i'm American and "the system" works for me. The fact you don't like it, don't vote and don't approve of it, is your problem. I already told you .. i'm glad you don't vote.
"The default state of humanity is not voting."
.....
Really? Is that what they're teaching nowadays?
Myself, i'd say the default state of Americans is to TRY to make a difference .. not to throw their hands in the air and give up .. that's Euro.
"To vote is to take an action, which should be justified."
.........
What "should be" don't mean squat .. deal with "what is"
It's like this .. Lead, follow or get out of the way.
So, fine .. you choose to get out of the way which works fine by me. I've already said i'm glad you don't vote.
To not vote is to not take action. Justified or not, you don't count.
"How does having read about Arrow put me in an "ivory tower"?
....
Doesn't IMO, I have no idea what Arrow is on about and care even less.
"Why shouldn't I point out the fact that I am above responsibility, given that I was asked by the original poster?"
.....
Maybe because your inaction makes you responsible for whoever won the election as much as if you'd voted for him/her.
Tell yourself whatever you want, just don't expect everyone to agree with you.
"Why did you reply to my post, in that case?"
....
I didn't, my 1st post here simply followed yours and you assumed I was replying to you.
"What convinces you, if anything, that determining group opinion from the totality of individual opinions is the best way to run a society?"
....
Never said it was the "best way", just that it's always been the American way and therefore, I support it. If you don't like it .. so much the better from my POV.
"Do you agree it would be disingenuous to vote in local elections?"
....
No opinion at all .. just glad you don't vote.
"What does this even mean?" (in reply to my reference to "fairness"😉
........
The word "fair" is a buzzword of the left. As if above all, life and everything about it should be fair.
"Should be" is quite different from "is."
I SHOULD have Jessica Alba calling me to come to bed. She's not, so I quit women .. i'll show her.
Life ain't fair, never has been, never will be. To expect fairness in politics is, at best, naive, at worst, plain stupid. To opt out because the system isn't fair IYO works fine for me. How many times do I have to say .. i'm glad you don't vote.
My vote "may not count" according to you. Your non-vote surely counts as a vote for whoever won.