The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Review: 'Democracy's raw deal'

Review: 'Democracy's raw deal'

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All
Dear Banjo,

Sorry, but I am afraid that you missed my whole point and responded about something else altogether.

Please allow me to rephrase:

You and others discussed here what kind of a majority is proper in a democracy, in terms of both the votes expressed and voter turnout. That is OK, but nobody here previously asked a much more crucial question:

- Majority of WHAT?

Not "what majority", but who and why is to be included in the sample from which a majority is sought.

Please reread my previous post.
Posted by Yuyutsu, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 12:00:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Dear ttbn,

.

You wrote :

1. « Compulsory voting is the topic. BJ. You are either for it or against it »
.

Philosophically, I place a very high value on personal freedom. Therefore, philosophically, for myself, I favour voluntary voting.

However, as I noted in my previous post, voluntary voting was practiced in Australia at the first 9 federal elections but proved to be ineffective because of the poor voter turnout. Hence the imposition of compulsory voting.

I would have preferred that voluntary voting be maintained with the adoption of the double majority system I indicated in my previous post :

• More than 50% of all votes expressed should be in favour of the motion

• At least 66.6% of voter turnout, i.e., at least 66.6% of the total population eligible to vote, must have voted, irrespective of what or who they voted for.

As it seems we can’t count on the civic sense of our compatriots to go to the polls and vote in local, state and federal elections, I have no problem accepting compulsory voting in the common interest.

It's no skin off my nose. I always vote anyway and will continue to do so.
.

2. « Compulsory voting is the topic. BJ. You are either for it or against it. ‘Irrespective’ of what other countries do. Can you list these “other” countries? »
.

There's no mention of “other countries” in my previous post, ttbn. You wrote that, not me.

I think you are referring to what I wrote as follows :

« There are currently 32 countries worldwide with compulsory voting, of which 19 (including Australia) pursue it through enforcement.

10 of the 30 members of the OECD have compulsory voting. »

The source of that information is an article by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) on “Compulsory voting in Australia” (Updated: 20 November 2023) :

http://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/voting/index.htm
.

3. « The system works … where voting is not compulsory. »
.

Not, as I see it, in the 27 countries where the voter turnout is less than 66.6% :

http://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/11/01/turnout-in-u-s-has-soared-in-recent-elections-but-by-some-measures-still-trails-that-of-many-other-countries/

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 1:30:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
P.R. Sarkar, the founder of Prout opines,

“The prerequisites for the success of democracy are morality, education, and socio-economico-political consciousness. Leaders especially must be people of high moral character, otherwise the welfare of society will be jeopardized. But today in most democracies, people of dubious character and those with vested interests are elected to power. Even bandits and murderers stand for election and form the government. Prout demands economic democracy, not political democracy. To make democracy successful, economic power must be vested in the hands of the common people and the minimum requirements of life must be guaranteed to all.”

http://prout.info/the-charade-of-democracy/
Posted by Paul1405, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 4:36:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
.

Dear Yuutsu,

.

You ask :

« Not "what majority", but who and why is to be included in the sample from which a majority is sought. »
.

It is compulsory by law for all Australian citizens aged 18 or over to enroll and vote in local, state, and federal democratic political elections. If you have Australian citizenship, and, as I suppose is the case, over the age of 18, Yuyutsu, you have a legal obligation to vote in your local, state, and federal democratic political elections.

If you do not have Australian citizenship, you are not allowed to vote.

To answer your question, “who is to be included in the sample from which a majority is sought”, the reply is :

- everybody who is an Australian citizen aged 18 or over and registered on the electoral roll as being eligible to vote

Next question : “why are they to be included in the sample from which a majority is sought”. The reply is :

- because they have a legal obligation to vote for whoever or whatever they choose among the different candidates and options indicated on the voting papers.

So, if you do not have Australian citizenship, Yuyutsu, and you wish to investigate the question, here is a link to assist you :

http://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/citizenship/become-a-citizen

But if you already have Australian citizenship but are not yet enrolled to vote in democratic political elections (which you should be), here is a link to the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) where you can enroll online:

http://www.aec.gov.au/enrol/

.
Posted by Banjo Paterson, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 6:07:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BP,

It is possible to find all sorts of statistics if you rely on Google: some wrong, some right. And you can wear down most people if you keep piling it on, particularly if your writing is not very good, and bores your targets. Most people give up.

You overlook the fact that opinion is the name of the game here on Online Opinion; and after the human brain matures, opinions rarely, if ever change. Attitudes can change, but not opinions.

So, all the arguments here are really a waste of time. I've been on OLO from its inception. I and other posters of the same era have never changed our opinions.

So, it is still my opinion that compulsory voting is undemocratic, no matter where it is enforced, no matter what "gems" of information you find,or invent - I will always be of that opinion. I'm sure that you are of the same mind in what you think, and good luck to you.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 10:06:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BP

As a keen follower and critic of Donald Trump, you might be interested to know that a federal judge has denied California's wacky plan to sue Trump for dealing with rioters in LA against the totally legitimate and expected deportation of illegal entrants.

That's the riots where people who don't want to be sent back to Mexico are actually waving Mexican flags. These people are very confused in more ways than one.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 11 June 2025 12:19:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy