Obligation to vote, Terrible, terrible Options

[Nymphetamine]

So, the Belgian community elections are over. I voted for the first time unwillingly! I was OBLIGED to vote because;

1 I'm a Belgian
2 I'm 18

That's insane!! Either I voted or paid a fine!! I don't think we should be forced to vote!

Does this happen in your countries?

Arrgh.

[smoke]

Nope, not in the USA. If you don't want to vote you don't have to. Only problem with that is that everyone complains about who's in office when they didn't even vote. In my opinion, if you don't vote you shouldn't complain.

[*mipadi*]

Nope, not in the USA. If you don't want to vote you don't have to. Only problem with that is that everyone complains about who's in office when they didn't even vote. In my opinion, if you don't vote you shouldn't complain.

What if you disagree not with who's in office, but with the very sociopolitical underpinnings of American "democracy"?

And by extension, why vote? If you're not a corporation with deep pockets, you're not likely to be heard, anyway.

[smoke]

What if you disagree not with who's in office, but with the very sociopolitical underpinnings of American "democracy"?

And by extension, why vote? If you're not a corporation with deep pockets, you're not likely to be heard, anyway.

Then express your opinion on that and vote for someone who's trying to change things. If you don't see anyone who matches that description, then I can see your reason for not voting but don't complain about who's in office. Furthermore, voting for someone who is closer to your idealistic candidate than their opponent is better than not voting at all. I don't exactly agree with "democracy" either but sitting on my butt not doing anything about it isn't going to help.

Uh, because we have the freedom to do so? Voting is your way of being heard. You'd be surprised how many people are just like you. I've encountered so many people with your exact thought process. As the old saying goes, if you want something done, do it yourself. Take action. There is power in numbers.

[*mipadi*]

Then express your opinion on that and vote for someone who's trying to change things. If you don't see anyone who matches that description, then I can see your reason for not voting but don't complain about who's in office. Furthermore, voting for someone who is closer to your idealistic candidate than their opponent is better than not voting at all. I don't exactly agree with "democracy" either but sitting on my butt not doing anything about it isn't going to help.

Uh, because we have the freedom to do so? Voting is your way of being heard. You'd be surprised how many people are just like you. I've encountered so many people with your exact thought process. As the old saying goes, if you want something done, do it yourself. Take action. There is power in numbers.

I think there are other ways to handle "being heard"; for example, by writing and publishing articles and essays, which I have done to a great extent—a simple task, thanks to both the freedom of the Internet, and my position as a newspaper editor.

I just don't think that voting is the way to get a message out. Candidates are more swayed by dollars than by the vote of the common man. Take a look at our current administration, which seems to ignore the popular voice on issues ranging from Iraq to abortion to stem cell research to the assault weapons ban to the removal of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Furthermore, politicians are unable to see more than 2-6 years down the road, so any issue that extends beyond that boundary gets completely ignored. Politicians only care about that which gives immediate results, which in turn adds more money (in the form of donations) to their coffers.

So I think, if a prudent person makes other attempts to sway the public, he has a right to not participate in a system that is both corrupt and almost completely ineffectual while still voicing his opinions loud and clear.

[smoke]

I think there are other ways to handle "being heard"; for example, by writing and publishing articles and essays, which I have done to a great extent—a simple task, thanks to both the freedom of the Internet, and my position as a newspaper editor.

I just don't think that voting is the way to get a message out. Candidates are more swayed by dollars than by the vote of the common man. Take a look at our current administration, which seems to ignore the popular voice on issues ranging from Iraq to abortion to stem cell research to the assault weapons ban to the removal of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. Furthermore, politicians are unable to see more than 2-6 years down the road, so any issue that extends beyond that boundary gets completely ignored. Politicians only care about that which gives immediate results, which in turn adds more money (in the form of donations) to their coffers.

So I think, if a prudent person makes other attempts to sway the public, he has a right to not participate in a system that is both corrupt and almost completely ineffectual while still voicing his opinions loud and clear.

Yeah, that's why I said if your decide not to vote, in the bery least, do something about it. I'm really glad to hear you do that.

Yeah, I can see your point, but at least it gives us some what of a choice to choose who we want in office. How would you go about solving the problem? Seriously, I'm curious.

How is it corrupt and completely ineffectual? It seems to have been working pretty well for quite some time now. How would you collect votes from a massive number of people to make it fair and uncorrupt?

[*mipadi*]

Yeah, that's why I said if your decide not to vote, in the bery least, do something about it. I'm really glad to hear you do that.

Yeah, I can see your point, but at least it gives us some what of a choice to choose who we want in office. How would you go about solving the problem? Seriously, I'm curious.

How is it corrupt and completely ineffectual? It seems to have been working pretty well for quite some time now. How would you collect votes from a massive number of people to make it fair and uncorrupt?

I don't think it has worked well. Votes don't come from the people, they come from rich corporations. Politicians are primarily concerned with lining their own pockets. The political system is set up so those with the biggest wallets get the most access.

It's ineffectual because politicians are generally only concerned with the next election, so issues that are more than 2-6 years away—global warming, population control, etc.—aren't considered as issues. Furthermore, politicians only try to appease the base and rally around the people (who they don't really represent anyway) by dealing with hot-button issues such as gay marriage and abortion.

Ideally, I wouldn't concern myself with how to collect votes from a massive number of people, because I don't think democracy is the best, most fair, or most efficient political system. Socrates, through Plato, lays out most of the issues with democracy in Republic. I feel that politicians should represent the people not in the sense that they do the people's bidding, but they act in the best interest of the people. The fact is, except on a scant few issues, the American public, as a whole, doesn't have a solid enough foundation to actually form intelligent opinions.

Look at economic issues, for example—taxes, Social Security, and the like. Most people form opinions based on what politicians (who are already corrupt) tell them, not what their own investigations reveal. Even I don't feel I have enough knowledge to really understand most economic issues that politicians talk about.

So politics is really about pulling the wool over the people's eyes, not actually doing anything for them. Even our Founding Fathers realized that most people wouldn't be informed enough to make major political decisions—that's precisely why we have the Electoral College.

Socrates, of course, supported the idea of a "philosopher-king", an unwilling political participant who could truly act in the public's best interest. That's idealistic, of course, but Socrates was at least on the right track.

Barring that, I'm a strong supporter of the libertarian movement. I'm of the opinion that any government is inherently a repressive entity whose influence should be minimized as much as possible.