voting

[rioters bloc]

so in class on friday our topic was polling before elections and voting etc, and since recently there have been vague proposals by some politicians to introduce voluntary voting in australia, that subject cropped up too.

i got into fairly heated debate with pretty much the entire class, who all seem to feel that the kind of democracy that australia works under is actually representative of it's population.

anyways, i was wondering what people thought about compulsory vs voluntary voting in federal or state elections

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Comrade,

There's been at least 10 threads made on this same topic before. You should do a search before you make a post on something that's likely to have been discussed before.

[Led Zeppelin]

I have yet to see a thread like this.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

On the usefullness of voting??

There's been many. Do a search.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 10:35 PM
On the usefullness of voting??

There's been many. Do a search.
they didnt ask if voting was usefull, they asked what people thought about compulsory vs voluntary voting.

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

What's this:


i got into fairly heated debate with pretty much the entire class, who all seem to feel that the kind of democracy that australia works under is actually representative of it's population.

Discussing the validity of "representative" democracy under capitalism, no? If it's not vaild it's not useful to participate right?

That, and what you've brought up have been discussed as well.

But nevermind, forget I said anything.. double, triple, & quadruple post! ;)

[rioters bloc]

that point you quoted cdl was kinda an off the topic thing ;P my actual question WAS abt voluntary vs compulsory voting. but i'll do a search anyway. here's a whinge: i don't like the search feature on rev left :P i can never find ANYTHING! :(

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

Yeah it's not the best.. just trying to prevent multiple posts on the same thing..

I think Ricardo Alarcon had some interesting things to say about this here (http://www.freepeoplesmovement.org/ry/rys5b.html).

[bolshevik butcher]

I think that representitive democracy is a joke, but that not voting is also foolish. Might as well use your vote to try and benifit the socialist movement.

[Ownthink]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 9 2005, 08:09 AM
I think that representitive democracy is a joke, but that not voting is also foolish. Might as well use your vote to try and benifit the socialist movement.
If No politician represents you at all, and you believe that "representative democracy" is a fucking joke, then how can we vote?

In AMerica last year, a vote for Kerry was just as bad as a vote for Bush. Kerry even stated he would "Win in Iraq". They both don't give a shit. I mean hey, this is Kerry, the guy who murdered people while in Vietnam and ordered the torching of some Hooches.

They both sucked ass.

[Black Dagger]

Both compulsory and voluntary voting systems are problematic in a capitalist society,

Compulsory- the first objection is that you are 'forcing' people to 'exercise their rights' which seems quite silly/authoritarian. The problem that arises is that if the government does not force everyone to vote, most people will not, or at least, a lot of people will not, thus delegitimising the 'democratic process' and the government. This is true because of the alienation caused by capitalist society and bourgeois politics. People are discouraged from actually participating in the political process, and prevented from effecting changes in their lives- a limit of a bourgeois political system.

This is bad from a ruling class stand-point because they want to create the impression that democracy is real and that it is representative, and it's easier to do both of these things if voting is compulsory. If everyone votes they can stand strongly behind the 'fact' that their government is 'representative' of popular opinion, they now have a 'mandate for rule'.

Voluntary- voluntary voting is clearly the better option, and it would be the standard of a communist society, but in a capitalist society it can be problematic. Precisely because capitalism and bourgeois politics alienate people, actually discouraging and preventing participation, voluntary voting means that a lot of people dont end up getting to the polls. The result can be more unrepresentative governments (even by bourgeois standards).

The rub here is that regardless of the voting laws, compulsory of voluntary, no bourgeois government, no capitalist state will ever be legitimate or representative, and furthermore representation does not equal democracy, what we want is direct-democracy, self-management. Voluntary voting is good because if no one votes the state is to a degree delegitimised as a force in society, as such many anarchist and marxist groups run 'no-vote' campaigns, to discourage people from voting to expose the hypocrisy and hollowness of bourgeois 'representative democracy'. I think that is a good idea.

As opposed to capitalist society, in a communist society voluntary voting works because it is not based on bourgeois notions of 'elite representation'- but of direct-democracy, real democracy, real social mobilisation, people controlling their own lives, workplaces and communities. The orientation is completely different, the alienation of capitalism and bourgeois politics evaporates, because the gains of participatin in a communist society are tangible, not smoke-screens, as in bourgeois 'democracy'.

Although voting is compulsory in oz, i don't vote (donkey-vote city), but be intelligent about it, write exactly why you're going the donkey on your ballot paper, never know who might read it! :D

[rioters bloc]

ive never had to vote in elections before [underage] but basically in class i was giving my arguments about why i would do a donkey-vote when i did

and they all kinda ignored me in their 'oh there's oishee with her silly rants again' which is fine with me cos most of them are libs anyway :P

but then i got into an argument with my lefty friends afterwards about the exact same thing, and they actually had rational arguments so it was a little tougher. basically saying that donkey-voting wasnt actually disengaging from the system at all.

anyways maybe ill continue tomorrow [today?] when im less tired/hungry.

[Black Dagger]

How is donkey-voting NOT disengaging from the bourgeois political process? What's the alternative? Voting? :lol: If that alternative is voting, or voting for the greens :rolleyes:, their arguments are completely irrational- voting is complete legitimisation of bourgeois democracy. In such a system all that us subjects can do, our only role, is to vote every few years, that's it- that's our only compulsory engagement with the system. Not voting is dodging that obligation, that engagement.

[rioters bloc]

well that was my argument. because by their reasoning the only way i could truly disengage would be by not voting at all, in which case id be fined 50 bucks and be made to vote anyway :|

[bolshevik butcher]

Originally posted by Ownthink+Oct 9 2005, 02:26 PM--> (Ownthink @ Oct 9 2005, 02:26 PM)
Clenched [email protected] 9 2005, 08:09 AM
I think that representitive democracy is a joke, but that not voting is also foolish. Might as well use your vote to try and benifit the socialist movement.
If No politician represents you at all, and you believe that "representative democracy" is a fucking joke, then how can we vote?

In AMerica last year, a vote for Kerry was just as bad as a vote for Bush. Kerry even stated he would "Win in Iraq". They both don't give a shit. I mean hey, this is Kerry, the guy who murdered people while in Vietnam and ordered the torching of some Hooches.

They both sucked ass. [/b]
Yes, but kerry was still probably slightly better than bush, or you coudla voted nader, a protest vote isnt a bad diea.

[Black Dagger]

yes, but kerry was still probably slightly better than bush, or you coudla voted nader, a protest vote isnt a bad diea.


What's the point in supporting the 'slightly better' capitalist [Kerry]? Or voting for a less-important capitalist [Nader]? We're communists, no bourgeois politican or parliament is good enough for us! Don't legitimise capitalist hegemony by supporting bourgeois politicians.

[bolshevik butcher]

I've already said i oppose the beugoirse appartus, but that was exactly the same stance taking by the german communist party in the aftermarth of there failed revolution, all that happened was that workers either didnt vote or voted for the beugoirse social democrats. It didnt get them anywhere and the communist party was parctically destroyed.

[patrickbeverley]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 03:26 PM
In AMerica last year, a vote for Kerry was just as bad as a vote for Bush.
No it wasn't. Kerry's policies were much better than Bush's. You might not support either one, but if you don't vote for the lesser of two evils, you can't complain when the greater of two evils wins.