Mandatory voting

[Aractus]

Mandatory voting is antithetical to a society that holds liberty as one of its basic rights. Seriously, how does forcing the citizenry to show up at an appointed place, on a specific date, between certain hours, to carry out a prescribed task mesh with the idea of liberty?

It's absolutely essential for an equitable democracy. The working class and those living below the poverty line are under-represented in an "optional voting" model. It is a civic duty. You may as well claim that having to get a "driving license" is anti-liberty?

[Cato]

It's absolutely essential for an equitable democracy.

What is an equitable democracy and why is voting essential to it? I certainly hope you aren't invoking some type of egalitarian utopia here.

The working class and those living below the poverty line are under-represented in an "optional voting" model.

Fuck 'em then. The goddamn apathy of some of my fellow citizens is not sufficient reason to force me to do something under penalty of law. The "I know what's best for you" mantra that underlies this is also disgusting.

It is a civic duty. You may as well claim that having to get a "driving license" is anti-liberty?

I addressed this already. Did you not read my last paragraph, or are you serioiusly going to maintain that you don't see how a driver's license applies.

[jesus_wept]

You vote for politicians (or political parties) and they ignore you and do what they want once elected, so what's the point in making voting mandatory? Implement direct democracy and I might see the point in mandatory voting, even then I don't like the idea of forcing people to vote on issues they're not interested in, but until then, what's the point?

[Aractus]

It's absolutely essential for an equitable democracy.

What is an equitable democracy and why is voting essential to it? I certainly hope you aren't invoking some type of egalitarian utopia here.

An equitable democracy means that everyone has an equal voice, and that all socioeconomic classes and all other sub-groups of society (for example, women) have an equal say and an equal opportunity in voting.

Without that you do not have a real democracy.

The working class and those living below the poverty line are under-represented in an "optional voting" model.

Fuck 'em then. The goddamn apathy of some of my fellow citizens is not sufficient reason to force me to do something under penalty of law. The "I know what's best for you" mantra that underlies this is also disgusting.

Um, perhaps you don't understand. Let's say Joe is a member of the working class, and Joe exercises his right to vote at every election, as does all of his friends. Joe is frustrated though that his group is under-represented because other members of his socioeconomic class don't see the same value in voting that he does. Is that [i/]his fault[/i]? "Fuck him"? I don't think so. It's a population benefit.

Let's take another example. Australia, and in specific Victoria (in 1970), was the first country in the world to legislate on seat belts. Sri Lanka legislated in 2011. They didn't want to, they said the law shouldn't tell people what to do. "You can't force people to do something they don't want with threat of fines". Yet they did it, and road fatalities that year fell by 57%.

It is a civic duty. You may as well claim that having to get a "driving license" is anti-liberty?

I addressed this already. Did you not read my last paragraph, or are you serioiusly going to maintain that you don't see how a driver's license applies.

Well now I've given you a new example. Not wearing your seatbelt does not put another person at risk.

[AFTT47]

Mandatory voting is antithetical to a society that holds liberty as one of its basic rights. Seriously, how does forcing the citizenry to show up at an appointed place, on a specific date, between certain hours, to carry out a prescribed task mesh with the idea of liberty?

It's absolutely essential for an equitable democracy. The working class and those living below the poverty line are under-represented in an "optional voting" model. It is a civic duty. You may as well claim that having to get a "driving license" is anti-liberty?

You are ignoring the practical aspect.

You CANNOT compel a person to make anything but a totally uninformed, random or deliberately stupid vote. How is it helping democracy to drag someone kicking and screaming into a voting booth only to have him/her randomly pull a lever and counter the vote of someone who actually does give a shit and just spent the last six months following the issues and the candidates and make an informed decision?

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's a slippery slippery slope right there. Yes, all rights have limits, but this isn't one of them. I would argue that protection of political speech was one of the primary reasons that the first amendment was created in the first place and that it far outweighs any social good that may come of it.

I would argue that the practice of granting corporations speech rights identical to individuals in the political sphere is a social harm far outweighing its good insofar as it supports and extends the corruption of the political system. With that in mind, corporate money should be removed from the political process -- including the election campaign.

I think it would be fine. Protectionism is never a long term solution anyway. The market will eventually correct it anyway[...]

When do you envision heavy industry, or textiles, returning to America? I don't see a market correction happening there, and it's been forty years since Japan eviscerated our steel industry, to use one example. The Rust Belt is so named for a reason ... that is what happens when metal sits idle.

[...] and corporate subsidies have been a corruption filled disaster from the start. The idea that they are necessary is pushed on us by the same people who are buying up all the politicians. Since when should we listen to them?

I'm certainly not for any sort of corporate subsidies. I'm not sure what I wrote to convey otherwise, but I apologize if I gave you a mistaken impression. I am firmly against all private money, from corporations or individuals, infecting the political process.

[Dystopia]

If the system is so corrupt that voting is completely useless (like some are saying) then why not start a revolution, overthrow the current regime and implement a new system?

"We hold these truths to be sacred & undeniable; that all men are created equal & independent, that from that equal creation they derive rights inherent & inalienable, among which are the preservation of life, & liberty, & the pursuit of happiness; ..." - Thomas Jefferson (original draft of the Declaration of Independence).

Not to mention that the quote is full of complete utter bullshit that remains to be proven, I see no reason to hold it as being the truth because it's based merely on classic liberalism and its principles.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Well now I've given you a new example. Not wearing your seatbelt does not put another person at risk.

The expenses spared society by seat-belt and helmet laws justifies their enactment, especially in a country like the US where so many people do not have any health insurance.

Comparing that to mandatory voting doesn't seem straightforward, to me, because mandatory voting is at least as likely to produce negative repercussions. How many apathetic people who didn't want to vote are going to drop in a blank slip? How many are going to vote for the loudest buffoon giving it no thought at all? How many are going to be scofflaws, and what mechanism would you propose to bring them to justice?

The cons outweigh the pros in this issue, I believe.

---

If the system is so corrupt that voting is completely useless (like some are saying) then why not start a revolution, overthrow the current regime and implement a new system?

Probably because international megacorporations would likely buy that up as well.

[Dystopia]

I don't see the relevance, if you overthrow the regime you automatically overthrow corporations as well. If voting is useless then you don't live in a democracy, and therefore making voting mandatory is ok even if it is anti-democratic.

[Vox Populi]

I really just have so many mixed views... that I can't come to a conclusion if its good or bad. I would love to see a bigger turn out at the voting polls and things... but it be required? IDK...