Hypothetical: What if no one voted in a democratic election?

[Wirey]

Another student wouldn't have been considered if their parents hadn't voted in a provincial election?


That officials abusing access to data might use it against your family if you don't?

The system rewards the politicos for acting that way. If you were them, you'd do the same thing. Screaming at the banquet won't save you from starving.

 

[Yerda]

The system rewards the politicos for acting that way. If you were them, you'd do the same thing.

Would I? Why?

Screaming at the banquet won't save you from starving.

That's a bit too cryptic for me, snowman. Can you put in dummy terms?

 

[Wirey]

Would I? Why?


That's a bit too cryptic for me, snowman. Can you put in dummy terms?

I was implying that your question about another student being rejected fi their parents were non-voters was naïve. Of course they would be rejected. We built a system that rewards politicians for behaving in their own best interest to get re-elected, and then claim foul when they behave in that manner. That was it.

 

[Yerda]

I was implying that your question about another student being rejected fi their parents were non-voters was naïve.

I see.

Of course they would be rejected. We built a system that rewards politicians for behaving in their own best interest to get re-elected, and then claim foul when they behave in that manner. That was it.

I suppose I didn't understand the link between your parents having voted and getting a job with the local province. I work for a national agency and my partner works for a local authority and I've never heard of anything like this coming up in recruitment. I'd have been buggered if the organisation I work for looked at my patchy voting.

 

[Wirey]

I see.


I suppose I didn't understand the link between your parents having voted and getting a job with the local province. I work for a national agency and my partner works for a local authority and I've never heard of anything like this coming up in recruitment. I'd have been buggered if the organisation I work for looked at my patchy voting.

It was the 80s. Maybe things change.

 

[Nakosis]

I have a hypothetical situation for you guys today: Suppose a democracy had a presidential election, but no one voted. What would that imply for the legitimacy of the government?

That hypothetical may seem too unrealistic for you, so let me throw at you another, more probable (though unlikely) hypothetical: What if, in the United States, less than half of the eligible voting population votes in the 2024 presidential election? What would that mean, if anything?

I suppose the question I am trying to ask and answer here is this: if "citizens" do not take part in a democratic election, is the democracy still "legitimate"? Suppose if less than half of the Americans eligible to vote, don't vote in this upcoming election. Regardless of who wins, can the victor call themselves truly democratically elected? Refusal to take part is a choice, a vote in a way, right?

You guys know my views, I see no government as "legitimate". But I know there are many proponents of democracy on this site, and I am curious about how you guys answer this hypothetical.

In that case the House elects the president and the Senate the vice president.

Both are supposed to be representative of the people so democracy would be safe I guess.

 

[Nakosis]

I have no clue what this is supposed to mean.

I do, but I'm going to keep it to myself.

 

[Yerda]

It was the 80s. Maybe things change.

But mullets keep coming back.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Some countries, like Australia, make voting compulsory. I'm not sure if that improves "democracy" or not. I believe it's OK to "abstain" by spoiling the voting paper, so really what is compulsory is turning up. My own feeling is that you can't compel genuine involvement, but I'd be interested in what our Aussie friends here have to say.

I like the compulsory element of our elections. It encourages an expectation that everyone votes, quite apart from the legal aspects, and improves diversity of representation. It also proactively deals with issues like subtly undermining voter access by government to discourage certain 'types' of voters. Or the perception of that.

It is somewhat a double edged sword though. We spend a lot of time explaining to people how to fill in voting forms correctly, but I think we should have a simple little box you can tick if you decide not to cast a vote, with a place to right your rationale if you want to.

Might not be valuable, but I think our current system and approach will encourage some people to just throw numbers on the sheet for the sake of it.

If course that happens regardless of system, but there you go.

On balance, I like our system.