Should voting be compulsory?

A social animal's life is politics. Voting is one aspect of politics.

Statistically, it matters little if one million vote, or one hundred vote, if the voting group is normally distributed.

There are means of conducting politics far more effective than casting a measly vote. Forcing people to vote is pointless.
 
If I choose not to vote ( which I did not do ) why should that prevent me from complaining about the state of the nation.

Let me take you through the logic.

You complain > which means you're unsatisfied with the state of affairs > you would like to see some change > the only way you can contribute to bring about change is to vote > you vote.

or the inverse

You don't vote > you do not make a contribution to bring about change > you would not like to see some change > which means you're satisfied with the state of affairs > you don't complain.

Not voting in no way prevents you from complaining, it just shows that you're kinda stupid if you in fact do decide to complain.

If there is not a party in my area that I can support 100% should I compromise my standards by voting for the least offensive option ?

Yes. It's just logical that we all can't vote for parties that represent our values, beliefs and interests 100%. Otherwise we would have millions of parties and make no progress. Living in a society necessarily implies some compromises. Even living with a single person, your wife, means making some compromises. It's obvious, isn't it?
 
Last edited:
Yes I understand the logic.

But the point is you can't say ' if you don't vote you can't complain '.

You can. What's to stop you ?
 
It's the same as UN votes - you can vote yes, no, or abstain.

Those that abstain still have a right to criticise those who voted in favour or against.
 
Yes I understand the logic.

But the point is you can't say ' if you don't vote you can't complain '.

You can. What's to stop you ?

You're now messing with words. Surely you know that someone saying "if you don't vote you can't complain" really means "you should not complain" or "you're an idiot for either complaining or not voting".

So you agree with the statement: "If you do not vote, you should not complain"?
 
You're now messing with words. Surely you know that someone saying "if you don't vote you can't complain" really means "you should not complain" or "you're an idiot for either complaining or not voting".

So you agree with the statement: "If you do not vote, you should not complain"?

No I don't agree with it.

If I feel the choice of politicians are all useless then why would I vote for a useless politician ?
 
Some people travel a lot for work and aren't around to register, or aren't around to vote. It's the way it is, no use making voting compulsory or fining them for trying to make a living.
 
"Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken.

My friends react with horror to my remark that I do not intend to vote in any future national elections. Both offer the same objection: "If you don't vote, how can you complain about the actions of the government?"

I presume they make that complaint because it is the first thing which pops into their heads. It certainly seems, at first blush, to have validity. In fact, it is utterly vacuous. Since we are lunching together, I ask, "Did you vote for the cook?" Their puzzled look inspires my next question.

"Did you ever fly on an airliner?" I ask. "Sure," is the reply. "So what?"

"Did you vote for the pilot?" Furrowed brows, quizzical stares. "No, of course not. Why should we?"

"Exactly. You expected that the pilot, whoever he was, would be qualified to do the job, right?" "Of course."

"And if, for some reason, there had been no pilot, would voting on which passenger was to fly the plane have made any sense?" Impatient shakes of the head. "No!"

"Well, there you have it. The President's job is not complex. His duties are listed in the Constitution, and they are not difficult. If the man elected to the job were to fulfill those duties, and uphold his oath to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution, what difference would it make who he was? Did it matter who flew the plane, drove the bus, or delivered the milk? Similarly, if the man elected had no intention of fulfilling the duties of President, would that be OK if he had been elected by a landslide?"

Besides, if voting is the right way to select people for important (more or less) jobs, why should it be limited to politics? Why NOT vote for the pilot of your next airline flight? "If you survived an airliner crash, would you sue your fellow survivors, if any, and the families of the passengers who died?" Blank stares. "Huh?"

"Well, they failed to do their duty to vote for the best man for pilot. Had they voted, they might have elected someone who would have avoided this disaster. Their indifference might have cost people their lives! Or would you say that, even had the pilot staggered aboard drunk, you still have no cause for complaint, because you didn't vote for him?"

I warm to my subject, pointing out that Presidents have dozens, if not hundreds, of advisers, and nobody votes for them; indeed, their very identity is known to few of us. Moreover, Supreme Court Justices, whose fantasies, written down, are considered the "law of the land," are not elected, although they are at least as important as the President.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/hein/hein70.html
 
Compulsory Voting is not democratic, but if you don't vote you have no right to complain,
so the people proudly posting that they didn't vote, remember that next time you are bitching in CA.
As a taxpayer, I can bitch and moan as much as I like, whether I voted or not ;)
Well said.

It is sickening that some people's entire existence revolves around politics.

In reality, politics should play a small part and we should all spend our time living our lives, working, playing, and learning. That is what life is about - not what Zuma did today or what Juju said yesterday.
Not a big fan of politics myself, and while I agree with him, the actions of politicians do have an effect on our lives. It will affect the way we live our lives, and the way we work, play and learn. Even if you have no interest in politics at all, one can at least contribute towards avoiding an overwhelming majority rule, even if they vote for some random small party.
 
How has close run votes been working for africa thus far?

It seems close run votes have two outcomes.

Zim style
Civil war

O the latest one is 2 presidents. Could be a third possible outcome.
 
Last edited:
No I don't agree with it.

If I feel the choice of politicians are all useless then why would I vote for a useless politician ?

If you feel that all political parties are useless, that's fine, but they're obviously not equally useless. So you should then vote for the best one. Most reasonable people will agree that the ANC is not the best party to rule SA. There are better parties for the job, even if they are, according to you, useless. It follows that you should still cast a vote for the best party to do the job.
 
because ......

Because you are a citizen in the country you live in and you have a duty to vote because you gain benefits from government. A larger voting pool is also more representative of the peoples wishes. It could also stimulate more interest in the process of government and the parties/people you vote for which means more research on the voters part.

We don't see voting as a privilege (except for people disadvantaged due to apartheid). There are many places on this planet where people do not have have this inherent right although they would love to have it. Don't take what you have for granted and say 'my vote does not count for anything' as every singe vote does count, even if the party you voted for does not win it means a stronger opposition which in turn means someone is checking up on those in power.

We should all have an inherent distrust of those in power in order to secure our own future.
 
If you feel that all political parties are useless, that's fine, but they're obviously not equally useless. So you should then vote for the best one. Most reasonable people will agree that the ANC is not the best party to rule SA. There are better parties for the job, even if they are, according to you, useless. It follows that you should still cast a vote for the best party to do the job.

I never said they all are useless, and I personally did vote.

What I suggested was that if 'someone' found all the parties available to be useless or with unacceptable policies then not voting for any of them would be a justifiable option.

Sorry, I don't buy the 'pick the best of the bad choices' option.
 
Last edited:
Because you are a citizen in the country you live in and you have a duty to vote because you gain benefits from government.

Uhm no, we gain benefits from the government because we pay their salaries - and we pay their salaries whether we vote for them or not.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X