atw: Re: OT: Grumbling About Elections... vote NONE OF THE ABOVE [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
- From: Ana Young <ana_young2000@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: "austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 14:57:42 -0700 (PDT)
Hi,
I do not want to start another war of words, really, but, as a person that grew
up in a dictatorship, I have to say I'm 100% for compulsory voting. Why? People
get lazy and/or totally disinterested in voting, especially when you know that
your vote is not worth the paper it is printed on. So, when a revolution comes
along and you know that your vote is now worth something, the first time around
you do vote. You may even vote the second time around. Then you again stop
caring. The voting booths are too far, you have better things to do on a
Saturday, etc. Lo and behold, the party that you really do not want to be in
power, is the party that has all its members voting and, after the election,
it's just a tad too late to complain.
So, I really want to see everybody voting. You may not succeed in electing the
party you like but, hopefully, you ensure that the one(s) you really think
should not be elected do not get enough votes.
I think that we, Australians (I'm one), tend to forget how very lucky we are,
how good our laws actually are, and how free we are! Let's vote, guys – we can
(with no worries about our safety) and we must. If you don't, we have no right
to complain about the party that gets the top job.
Ana
________________________________
From: "Peter.Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Peter.Martin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 20 August 2012 11:26 AM
Subject: atw: Re: OT: Grumbling About Elections... vote NONE OF THE ABOVE
[SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]
>The system is wrong. The system is corrupt. The system is not just amoral, it
>is immoral. I will not be forced to conform to a flawed, corrupt and immoral
>system.
> End of story.
Christine:
Unlike some who support compulsory voting as it is, I have to say I think you
have a point.
But saying a system that is flawed is "corrupt", "amoral" and "immoral" is
really a bit much. And suggesting then that I am "embedded" in corruption
demeans me without cause. You've just gone over the top there.
Voting systems don't have morals. They may be flawed, badly designed,
unworkable. But corruption, amorality, and immorality are characteristics of
the people who misuse them, design them deliberately for the wrong purpose, and
enforce them that way etc.
[BTW you don't have to conform to the system in all aspects. For a start,
just get older -- then you don't have to vote. Voting is not compulsory for
those of us who are really mature. So would you say I have grown out of
immorality, corruption and amorality now ? ( Of course not -- I'm still
desperately trying to sin, although I'm avoiding the amorality and corruption
bits, thank you.)]
As for the system flaw: I happen to agree with you that a compulsory voting
system is wrong and wrong-headed and badly designed if it does not have
adequate safeguards, and our system is in that category, as far as I'm
concerned. And systems that do not have adequate safeguards can be exploited
by people who are incompetent and lazy or even immoral, amoral, corrupt etc.
Chances are in most cases, however, that incompetence and indolence have more
followers than corruption. That's almost a corollary of Ockam's Razor.
To illustrate what I mean, let me jump to the Simple Solution:
It can all be mostly fixed if we allow a formal vote for "NONE OF THE ABOVE"
every time we have compulsory voting.
It is not good enough, as some seem to suggest, that you are forced to cast an
informal vote if you disagree with all choices, and that informal vote is
treated as though it has no defined meaning -- it is really treated as a
mistake. You are right to object to the lack of choice that is implied in
the easy option of an informal vote.
(BTW -- while it was until 1998 an offence to advocate a deliberate informal
vote, following the Langer case, the law was amended. It is not an offence to
cast a deliberate informal vote -- and nor should it be, given secret ballot
rights.).
The prospect of a formal tally for explicit and formal votes for NONE OF THE
ABOVE might go a lot further to redress some system balance than might at first
be evident, but think of it this way:
1. At present we have major parties with officials who are only too willing to
claim victory and justification of their
immorality/corruption/indolence/exploitation of prejudice because they can
point to relatively large percentages of formal votes.
2. If you consider that before we had compulsory voting (ie pre 1925 elections)
a reasonable %age of the enrolled population who voted was around 65 - 70%,
we can assume that outright compulsion potentially accounts for about 30% of
the vote. [This is more or less in line with many of the results in the
majority of democratic voting systems -- non compulsory ones.]
3. In more recent years, in some areas, I'd suggest that a non-compulsory
election would have been lucky to pick up a 50% vote.
4. Imagine the impact on all the major parties if a NONE OF THE ABOVE vote was
permitted and could rise as high as even 25-30%. For that matter, try 10%!
Jobs for the Boys would be starting to look really sick. Performance
indicators might suddenly change. And if there's one thing we need at present
in all parties, it's a case of those boys looking really as sick as they are,
and their KPIs (excuse my language) changing.
At times, I have been tempted to actually start a party called "None of the
Above" and see what votes (and preferences) I could pick up.
I still think it might be worth a try.... but first you'd have to convince a
pretty conservative Electoral Commission to accept the party name. Now
THERE's an exercise.
Peter M
--
This message contains privileged and confidential information only
for use by the intended recipient. If you are not the intended
recipient of this message, you must not disseminate, copy or use
it in any manner. If you have received this message in error,
please advise the sender by reply e-mail. Please ensure all
e-mail attachments are scanned for viruses prior to opening or
using.
Other related posts:
