I maintain it should be required by law to vote, punishable by expatriation. If one doesn’t want to do the one thing required of them in a democracy, they can gtfo and live in an undemocratic country.
Anyway, voting is literally the least a person can do to participate in democracy. It’s largely symbolic and serves more to placate us and keep us uninvolved in the actual practice of governance.
Anyway, voting is literally the least a person can do to participate in democracy. It’s largely symbolic and serves more to placate us and keep us uninvolved in the actual practice of governance.
I don’t think you should have wasted our time with such a pointless comment, but here we are.
Nope. I am serious. We have to literally do one thing as citizens and that is vote. If one isn’t willing to do that one doesn’t get the benefits of a democracy.
You act like I have the power to do anything at all. Chill out. I don’t care how it would be done I think that’s how it should be because it is that easy and important to vote.
It’s full implementation is unacceptable as a hard rule. I agree with doing a lot to ensure everyone votes, but removing rights for reasons beyond one’s control is the opposite of helpful.
Expatriation means losing basically every right in the charter, and is politically equivalent to execution. This reason (failing to vote) is also heavily biased towards people with less control over their lives, and disrupting someone from voting could be used as a weapon.
I can see punishments for failing to vote, but such an extreme response should be reserved for those who explicitly choose not to vote, and such a system would need a rigorous judgment to act on.
Having such a thin line between citizenship and expatriation is too dangerous. On one hand, choosing not to vote may be considered a serious enough act, but on the other hand there are dozens of reasons a vote can fail to be cast, and they would all need to be addressed before something as serious as expatriation is considered as a punishment.
I know what expatriation means, hence why it is a part of my idea. Frankly, if one doesn’t have a really good reason not to vote I don’t care how extreme the punishment is.
As I said in another comment cheap and easy like a good old fashioned ice float for being too lazy to do the one thing required of you in a democracy. If you believe that means people physically, or mentally, incapable of being able to do that would be expatriated you need to touch grass because we have numerous laws with exceptions. Welcome to Canada.
I can imagine that someone’s best choice can be to entirely abstain from voting in some situations. I don’t think it’s ethical to force people to vote if doing so would harm them.
Making a law about an obligation to vote will probably make future electoral reform harder (since people will have to figure out / get confused about whether a change will make it more likely for them to land in court), and making it hard to change bad systems is surely a bad thing.
Incentivizing someone to show up and just cast a blank ballot could make it harder to detect fraud. For example, it might be convenient to dispose of ballots that someone intended to misuse by mixing them in with the legitimate ballots, and having more blank ballots that are actually legitimate would make it less clear whether something illegal has happened.
“Voting in all federal elections in Australia is a legal obligation for citizens aged 18 and over”, but there isn’t a very steep penalty for not doing so (and you might even get your name published in a newspaper, which some people might value for its own sake):
Having early voting and making the “main” voting day be a holiday for a large number of people seems like a good idea, since that makes voting easier for people who want to vote. Hounding people who don’t want to vote (regardless of their reasoning) seems like a worse idea.
The blank ballot can be easily remedied by allowing the spoiling of ballots, or marking the vote in a way that doesn’t indicate any choice.
I think this is a reasonable and valuable method of expressing political opinion, especially as this form can be counted. It also ensures that it was a deliberate choice and not just apathy.
Along the same path as incentivising people to vote, perhaps it should be cities/voting areas that get punished somehow for low voter turnout.
I maintain it should be required by law to vote, punishable by expatriation. If one doesn’t want to do the one thing required of them in a democracy, they can gtfo and live in an undemocratic country.
I don’t think you get democracy.
Anyway, voting is literally the least a person can do to participate in democracy. It’s largely symbolic and serves more to placate us and keep us uninvolved in the actual practice of governance.
I don’t think you should have wasted our time with such a pointless comment, but here we are.
Expatriation is a bit extreme, especially when we don’t even have a voting holiday. I agree with a strong incentive though, perhaps a 1-3% tax rebate?
deleted by creator
Nope. I am serious. We have to literally do one thing as citizens and that is vote. If one isn’t willing to do that one doesn’t get the benefits of a democracy.
You aren’t serious. How tf are you going to “expatriate” someone? Put them in a rowboat and tow them into international waters?
Trumps doing it, you make a monetary deal with a prison elsewhere and fly people there
You act like I have the power to do anything at all. Chill out. I don’t care how it would be done I think that’s how it should be because it is that easy and important to vote.
Maybe you can send them to El Salvador.
I was thinking something cheaper and easier like a good old fashioned ice float but its called a brainstorm for a reason.
I could see this if every opportunity was made to allow it.
Loosing citizenship due to a debilitating illness is completely unacceptable for example.
It is weird how humans immediately try to find exceptions to a rule without ever discussing its full implementation in the first place.
It’s full implementation is unacceptable as a hard rule. I agree with doing a lot to ensure everyone votes, but removing rights for reasons beyond one’s control is the opposite of helpful.
No one said rights would be removed for reasons beyond control. Quit being ridiculous, shit isn’t real.
Expatriation means losing basically every right in the charter, and is politically equivalent to execution. This reason (failing to vote) is also heavily biased towards people with less control over their lives, and disrupting someone from voting could be used as a weapon.
I can see punishments for failing to vote, but such an extreme response should be reserved for those who explicitly choose not to vote, and such a system would need a rigorous judgment to act on.
Having such a thin line between citizenship and expatriation is too dangerous. On one hand, choosing not to vote may be considered a serious enough act, but on the other hand there are dozens of reasons a vote can fail to be cast, and they would all need to be addressed before something as serious as expatriation is considered as a punishment.
I know what expatriation means, hence why it is a part of my idea. Frankly, if one doesn’t have a really good reason not to vote I don’t care how extreme the punishment is.
As I said in another comment cheap and easy like a good old fashioned ice float for being too lazy to do the one thing required of you in a democracy. If you believe that means people physically, or mentally, incapable of being able to do that would be expatriated you need to touch grass because we have numerous laws with exceptions. Welcome to Canada.
I suspect that, when certain election methods are used, it’s possible to make your preferred candidate lose if you express support for them:
I can imagine that someone’s best choice can be to entirely abstain from voting in some situations. I don’t think it’s ethical to force people to vote if doing so would harm them.
Making a law about an obligation to vote will probably make future electoral reform harder (since people will have to figure out / get confused about whether a change will make it more likely for them to land in court), and making it hard to change bad systems is surely a bad thing.
Incentivizing someone to show up and just cast a blank ballot could make it harder to detect fraud. For example, it might be convenient to dispose of ballots that someone intended to misuse by mixing them in with the legitimate ballots, and having more blank ballots that are actually legitimate would make it less clear whether something illegal has happened.
“Voting in all federal elections in Australia is a legal obligation for citizens aged 18 and over”, but there isn’t a very steep penalty for not doing so (and you might even get your name published in a newspaper, which some people might value for its own sake):
Having early voting and making the “main” voting day be a holiday for a large number of people seems like a good idea, since that makes voting easier for people who want to vote. Hounding people who don’t want to vote (regardless of their reasoning) seems like a worse idea.
The blank ballot can be easily remedied by allowing the spoiling of ballots, or marking the vote in a way that doesn’t indicate any choice.
I think this is a reasonable and valuable method of expressing political opinion, especially as this form can be counted. It also ensures that it was a deliberate choice and not just apathy.
Along the same path as incentivising people to vote, perhaps it should be cities/voting areas that get punished somehow for low voter turnout.
It is literally the only responsibility one has for all the rights and freedoms one enjoys in Canada.