Sunday May 27, 2012

Order by Time Order by Popularity

28 Comments

Login to comment

  • 0

    smartacus

    I'm definitely in favor of making voting compulsory, as they do in Australia. The low voter turnouts in many countries is appalling. In Japan, it was barely over 50%. That's dangerous because the "wrong" candidate can get elected if he or she can mobilize enough support. I call it the "Barabbas effect."

    In any case, democracy is a privilege. Citizens should want to participate in government. Too often, I have heard friends whining and criticizing politicians, and yet these same friends did not vote. I have always felt great when I cast my ballot, even when my candidate didn't win.

  • 0

    christa879

    If voting was compulsory then people who don't know anything about the candidates or issues will be voting, and be useless votes. How is that productive? People SHOULD care, but you can force people to.

  • 0

    VelvetRosetta

    I dont think it should be compulsory, not everyone likes politics, and so many don't vote for lack of knowledge, or the simple fact that neither party up for voting seems to be right for the job...I agree with christa...it could lead to useless votes...

  • 0

    Zenny11

    VelvetRosetta.

    Depend if you see voting as a RIGHT or a DUTY of Citizenship.

    Many people today are all for the rights but don't want to see or acknowledge the duties that come with being a Citizen(like defending your country, etc).

  • 0

    smartacus

    christa879, VelvetRosetta

    There is no such thing as a useless vote unless it is what, in Australia, is known as a donkey vote. That is when the voter doesn't like any candidate, so they write in Mickey Mouse or something like that.

    But, as I said above, I'd like to see all citizens take an interest in their countries' politics because whichever government gets in can affect all of our lives.

    The fact that voters lack knowledge, as you say, is not enough reason to stay away from polling stations. That right can easily be taken away if powerful people think certain people don't deserve the right.

    I am reminded of a frightening scene in the film "Remains of the Day," when some British fat cats and Nazi appeasers in pre-war Britain are sipping their brandy in the study and lamenting what a pity it is that the common man has the right to vote. To prove their point, they call in a servant and proceed to ask him his opinions on topics such as economics and politics. He can't give an opinion on any subject, thus proving their point that universal suffrage is an appalling waste of time.

  • 0

    Weasel

    Should NOT be compulsory. If you vote and some idiot gets into office and messes everything up, then you caused the problem. The person who didn't vote cannot be blamed for the mess the voter made. Think about it.

  • 0

    VelvetRosetta

    What's the use in scribbling Mickey Mouse..your not voting, I say why vote?..It is useless!

    waste of time.??? To me a waste fo time would be to give a vote for someone who does not deserve it..yes "whichever government gets in can affect all of our lives". But not always for the best...

  • 0

    SiouxChef

    I think not. The plebs already cause enough problems in non-compulsory systems.

    And I'll up the ante--there should be some kind of qualification process for suffrage to begin with; someone that doesn't know their brass from their woodwind shouldn't have a vote.

    The will of the majority isn't always right.

  • 0

    VelvetRosetta

    Zenny on that I am with you 100% but my issue is you can't make ppl vote.Some ppl are just not apt to do so, they have little interest in the subject ..until they need or want..coughs ...but still I dont believe it should be forced upon no-one.

  • 0

    sf2k

    As a Canadian I am in admiration of the Australian system of mandatory voting, as if nothing else it reminds people to think of themselves as citizens first with obligations and responsibilities, and not consumers. I don't doubt there are grumblings but for a democracy I think this is ideal and makes sure polticos are not taking advantage of low voter turnout to win backhandedly.

    I honestly think such a system here would turf out our own theo-con anti climate change PM Harper and as well would be a good idea in any country as a symbol of democratic responsibility.

    Ironically this is not in the USA as that would upset the corporate apple cart

  • 0

    christa879

    Voting IS a duty of a country's citizens, but if it becomes mandatory what are the consequences for those who don't vote? Fine them? Jail them? That's just ridiculous. Rather then making voting mandatory, countries should just better educate their people of the benefits of voting, educate them on the issues, educate them on history and modern politics, etc. An uneducated vote, is a vote for an ignorant public.

  • 0

    VelvetRosetta

    I like that idea much better christa...good way to go about it, I am sure it's a much more effective way to go about this situation..

  • 0

    borscht

    If voting is compulsory, ballots should include "None of the Above."

  • 0

    Triple888

    "Compulsory voting" ...oxymoron.

  • 0

    R_M_s

    As an Australian I always lament come election time that we have 'compulsory voting'. It is NOT an effective system. Many people vote only because they must and as such give little if any thought to their decision. These people in my experience seem to be guided predominantly by what they might hear in the media, exercising little thought of their own.

    Optional voting means that those who care about their countries leadership and policies will vote, while those who simply don't care will not. If people feel the government is not doing a good job, they can go and vote. Its the way democracy should work.

  • 0

    stormcrow

    Not voting or participating in the electoral process could be done and viewed as a form of protest, or, in other words, freedom of expression.

  • 0

    TheQuestion

    And I'll up the ante--there should be some kind of qualification process for suffrage to begin with; someone that doesn't know their brass from their woodwind shouldn't have a vote.

    I think a basic examination would be fine, give prospective voters the citizenship test. Being born in the country does not a good citizen make.

  • 0

    SiouxChef

    I think a basic examination would be fine, give prospective voters the citizenship test. Being born in the country does not a good citizen make.

    Exactly.

  • 0

    MrDog

    No.

    But, I'm sure it is, in places like North Korea.

  • 0

    koriyamaboy

    If voting is compulsory, than policticians must be obliged to do exactly what they promised and be jailed for an illegal activity. Otherwise you are just being made to vote for lies. Is participating in ignorance or delusion being a good citizen?

  • 0

    Tokyoapple

    Yes, but only if "none of the above" is included on the ballot.

  • 0

    Zenny11

    You can always hand in a "voided" vote. i.e. select 2 people instead of one.

    In my country(voting is compulsory) when they give the final count(usually around 8pm on voting day) they also give the figure for voided votes.

  • 0

    NationalistRE

    Compulsory voting is no incentive for eligible voters to think. You can however force the unwilling to cast spiteful ballots of protest that can bring absurd results such as the recent Reykjavik civic elections

  • 0

    grafton

    I’m not sure where but I have heard that some counties use a system that has a “white” vote that allows those that don’t agree with any of the parties on offer to more or less register a protest vote. If this were to be coupled with what koriyamaboy (at 12:10 PM JST - 13th July) wrote about forcing politicians to live up to their promises we would have a system that would bring both responsibility and right together. A “white” vote could in effect wipe out a whole election forcing some of the liars (sorry politicians) back to the drawing board.

  • 0

    VelvetRosetta

    grafton..forcing politicians to live up to their promises ...sighs..If this would happen, the world would be a better place!!!

  • 0

    smithinjapan

    I haven't read the other comments carefully, so forgive me if I repeat anything.

    My gut reaction is to say 'yes', particularly in nations like Japan where voter turnout is shockingly low in most cases, and only those with vested interests are guaranteed to turn up at the polls.

    However, I still think at heart that voting is a privelage and a right, not something that should be forced on you. If you HAVE to vote, doesn't it take away from the idea of democratic voting as a whole? The problem is that most people (again, especially here) aren't exercising their 'right not to vote', they're just too apathetic to bother, and will gripe about the results regardless of who gets in. What we need to do is educate people more about what each party/candidate stands for, where and how to vote, and how important it is that they turn up.

  • 0

    Disillusioned

    I'm sure it is, in places like North Korea.

    And Australia.

    Compulsory voting does seem extreme, but the recent election in Japan only had a 38% turnout, which is utterly ridiculous! That is just over a third of the population. If they could figure a way to encourage people to vote and lift the turnout to at least 70% compulsory voting would not be necessary.

  • 0

    Eccoman

    I think people who don't vote (except a donkey vote as a protest) don't have the right to complain if they don't like what the government of the day is doing.

    We've just had an election called yesterday in Australia for Aug 21st. There's a window until Monday evening for unregistered people to get onto the electoral roll but no penalty for those who haven't enrolled, so in a way voting is not compulsory in Australia.

    I'm probably going to vote for an independent candidate this time around. I'm basically conservative by philosophy but the Liberal Party here (roughly equivalent to the Republicans and Conservatives) have nothing outstanding to offer the Country and in many ways similar to the intellectually and morally bankrupt Australian Labor Party. The ALP has just dumped one arrogant and incompetent prat as Prime Minister and replaced him with a treacherous and equally incompetent socialist in sheep's clothing in Julia Gillard. Too many people ignore the fact that Gillard is just as tainted by failed and poorly considered policies as Rudd, but she's trying to bask in the glow of being Australia's first female PM, rambling on with some populist pap on asylum seekers, population policy, climate change, and the myth they saved the country from the worst of the GFC, which the ALP hopes will fool enough people during the campaign to get them across the line. The current government was just lucky they inherited a massive government surplus from the previous government, which they've squandered with bribes to the electorate and the disastrous home insulation scheme and Building the Education Revolution scam.

    As for the Liberal/National coalition, they need to show some backbone and run a positive campaign highlighting what they would do to improve the country, pull troops out of the bogus war on terror (they won't, of course), and clearly state they will unequivocally reject the proposed government internet filter, which is massive threat to free speech.

    As for the Greens, they'll probably benefit from the protest vote against Labor, but are essentially bereft of reasonable policies except for bringing our troops back from Afghanistan.

    It's little wonder people get cynical about voting because we have here the preferential system in the Lower House that gets the Laberals in every time, and they're barely different from each other at the end of the day: they just want to get re-elected. We need proportional representation so protest votes have some semblance of real value. Until then, compulsory voting is a fraud.

Back to top

Login to leave a comment

OR

Follow us

Facebook
Twitter

More in Poll

View all

View all