Should Democracy be compulsory?

plembobria

plembobria

TNPer
-
This was one of the first issues we all got on when we first joined NS. As far as RL is concerned. What's your opinion on compulsory voting? Does it deny an individual's right to self-determination? Or is it a necessary evil?
 
I see it that the more that participate, the better. More people's ideas, and voices are being heard which is ultimate a good thing in my view.
 
Technically democracy allows you to have a say in politics. And I believe Abstaining is a valid form of expression, thus you still are expressing political views and fulfilling democracy!
 
flemingovia:
Sloppy english. Democracy either is or is not. participation in democracy is what is compulsory or not.
Click to expand...
Of course, you realise that not participating is a form of participation.
 
Rather than being compulsory, it should be made easier and more representative.

Being forced to vote once in a while only allows an established order to claim more legitimacy.
 
As an Australian, I am fortunate to see the first-hand benifits of compulsive voting, which is a civic duty comparable to other duties we perform such as taxation, compulsory education and jury duty. Compulsive voting teaches the benefits of political participation and reinforces political activism, with Parliament reflecting more accurately the 'will of the electorate'. Governments are forced to consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management.
 
Amerion:
As an Australian, I am fortunate to see the first-hand benifits of compulsive voting, which is a civic duty comparable to other duties we perform such as taxation, compulsory education and jury duty. Compulsive voting teaches the benefits of political participation and reinforces political activism, with Parliament reflecting more accurately the 'will of the electorate'. Governments are forced to consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management.
Click to expand...
Is there always an option to abstain in the voting process, or are you forced to pick from the candidates available?
 
I don't really like representative democracy, especially when the politicians are either jerks or idiots. But on the other hand people often don't know what they want. Still, I think democracy is about certain liberty and civil rights, so the entire 'compulsory' idea seems wrong.
 
I'm not entirely convinced that abstaining from voting is a form of participation, unless apathy is an indication of some political function. Conscientiously abstaining is more rare and completely valid, in my opinion.

In school you are not given an option of not voting, whether it be on when to take a break or a class' opinion on some matter.

That being said, I think there is some conflict between compulsory voting and an individuals autonomy. My gut instinct tells me it is also not exactly in the spirit of democracy. So for the time being, I haven't made it compulsory.

My two cents.
 
Amerion:
As an Australian, I am fortunate to see the first-hand benifits of compulsive voting, which is a civic duty comparable to other duties we perform such as taxation, compulsory education and jury duty. Compulsive voting teaches the benefits of political participation and reinforces political activism, with Parliament reflecting more accurately the 'will of the electorate'. Governments are forced to consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management.
Click to expand...
But how much thought does the electorate give to who they vote for? In Senate elections 98% voters vote "above the line." I'm not saying that's a bad thing, since party discipline is rather tight in Australia; individual candidates may not really matter.

I do think STV and IRV (the electoral systems used to elect MPs in Australia. Look them up on Wikipedia.) probably force the voters to think more about the candidates in question since they have to rank them.

In the US we have primaries, where we decide which member of our party gets to be the official candidate in the first-past-the-post runoff elections. The turnout for primaries is rather pathetic. (I think it's around 20%.) I would definitely support switching to some form of STV or IRV. If we had just one election, where voters had to rank the candidates regardless of party, we'd probably have better candidates, and maybe a better turnout. Abolishing the Electoral College (or at least replacing it with some kind of proportional system) would be good too. Many people don't vote because they feel that their vote doesn't matter in the state where they live.

Compulsory voting is probably a rather good thing in Australia, since most Australians around here seem to support it. As for the United States, I think our electoral system needs to be completely reworked before it should even be considered.

Of course I the question I put in the OP had nothing to do with US elections. I was asking if people supported compulsory voting as a matter of principle. In my opinion, whether or not it's a good thing varies from country to country.
 
Alicia DiLaurentis:
I don't really like representative democracy, especially when the politicians are either jerks or idiots. But on the other hand people often don't know what they want. Still, I think democracy is about certain liberty and civil rights, so the entire 'compulsory' idea seems wrong.
Click to expand...
There are always exceptions to the assurance of civil rights and liberties. Without compulsory voting not everyone would vote and thus the results would be inaccurate. There must be some mandatory things so the laws work; and at the same time not too much so civil rights are preserved. The perfect democracy can balance mandatory procedures and civil rights to create what I call a "Goldilocks country".
 
I'm on the fence, but leaning towards compulsory voting being a net positive. However, I'm more enthusiastic about what Plemboria said: instant-runoff voting and the abolition of the Electoral College. I think a popular vote with instant runoffs would be much more beneficial to the US than our current system (though I think the IRV would almost undoubtedly not matter in Presidential elections). The only downside I see to IRV is that it takes a longer time to count, but I'm confident that if we started seriously considering a switch, new voting machines could be produced.
 
I live in Australia. Voting should be compulsory, because the government should represent the people, not just the motivated, energetic people.
 
Based purely upon the UK's political climate its a very resounding No. You can vote for one of five equally-idiotic monkeys but they still throw fecal matter at you. Any tit with the right cash and connections can stand for election.
 
I think it's nearly impossible to create a society where democracy is compulsory. Wait+ perhaps not impossible but it'd be a very extreme approach. Democracy is sacred because it emphasises the voters right to choose and freedom. It becomes counter intuitive to force freedom. Its almost a paradox. I do not think democracy should be compulsory.
 
Compulsory democracy would mean that political parties would have to try harder to please large minorities. I'm in favor of it.
 
My opinion on democracy should it be compulsory is, we shouldn't force people to vote in elections but encourage people do it, because it's particularly is one our freedom and our rights to allowed to make decision for our life and people who sort of control it (Not literal control) just metaphorical tell you what you can do and what you can't do, by voting. If we not we possible ended be in anarchy or in dictatorship world.

(I'm hoping making sense.)
 
Bustos:
Amerion:
As an Australian, I am fortunate to see the first-hand benifits of compulsive voting, which is a civic duty comparable to other duties we perform such as taxation, compulsory education and jury duty. Compulsive voting teaches the benefits of political participation and reinforces political activism, with Parliament reflecting more accurately the 'will of the electorate'. Governments are forced to consider the total electorate in policy formulation and management.
Click to expand...
Is there always an option to abstain in the voting process, or are you forced to pick from the candidates available?
Click to expand...
Australia uses paper ballots. It's fairly easy to make your ballot paper informal. Most easily, just leave it blank.

Interestingly enough, so long as it does not disclose the voter's identity, writing/drawing on the ballot paper does not make it informal. It's fairly common to see otherwise informal votes (i.e. blank) having interesting drawings on them (usually involving a penis).

I actually tend to agree that this is a good system. You don't want to participate? Leave your ballot paper blank. But the fact that voting is compulsory actually removes basically any ability for interferences with the right to cast a vote. Basically, apart from the most extreme circumstances, it ensures that nothing would get in your way. And in order to facilitate this, of course, expansive postal and early voting schemes are around.
 
Unfortunately, whilst I think that something should be done to increase voter turn-outs, I'm not convinced that mandatory voting will work.

It does nothing to combat apathy, nor does it even begin to look at a major issue: a lack of education regarding politics. Politics, in the United Kingdom is either an elective - offered by a minority of schools at GCSE or A-Level, or a separate degree level subject. There needs to be a comprehensive, impartial curriculum regarding politics and government studies offered in secondary school (11-18) to enable students to study and understand how the government works. As a direct benefit, we should see involvement in politics for that age group, and voter turnout increase once they are able to vote.
 
The problem with mandatory politics classes is that it's going to be difficult to keep them from being boring, and as such you're going to see more people skipping the class.
 
Nebula:
The problem with mandatory politics classes is that it's going to be difficult to keep them from being boring, and as such you're going to see more people skipping the class.
Click to expand...
The United Kingdom have classes called "Personal Development", PSHE, PSME - Physical, Social Health/Morale Education that are mandatory. It could be included into those areas.
 
I don't support. Sure, people's voices should be heard, but what if they don't WANT to be heard. What if they'd rather go with the flow and not give input. It's like forcing a domesticated dog to go into the wild and "be free"; what if they don't WANT to be part of the food web? What if they'd rather be took care of by their owners than to suffer in the woods? At least, that's how I see it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top