must I vote?
After the loss of the STV vote in BC, and my taking the time to learn about our FPTP system and other electoral systems, it's made me realize now what a bad system we have - that is if you are a populist and like proportional rep.
I live in a riding with a very safe seat. My vote is wasted whether I vote for the winner (my vote is surplus) or the loser (my vote can't be applied proportionately).
Since I have no input into the election WHY SHOULD I VOTE?
I reject the moral tone of the arguments thrown out in the media that one must vote. Doesn't a right to vote come with a right not to vote? My decision to not vote, is an informed one and not taken lightly. Under the system we have, it's a result particular to my geographical circumstance of living in safe riding. If that should change or I move to a swing riding, I would definitely vote as it would make a difference.
Moreover I will continue to support electoral reform.
I am now much more sympathetic to young voters who seem to see nothing in elections for them.
Any thoughts pro or con about my reasoning here?
Comments
Must? no way
Should? Well I encourage it personally, but whatever floats your boat. In terms of whether I should help someone who doesn't vote, were I one of the ones in charge of dispensing help, that is a slippery slope I would avoid.
After the loss of the STV vote in BC, and my taking the time to learn about our FPTP system and other electoral systems, it's made me realize now what a bad system we have - that is if you are a populist and like proportional rep.
I live in a riding with a very safe seat. My vote is wasted whether I vote for the winner (my vote is surplus) or the loser (my vote can't be applied proportionately).
Since I have no input into the election WHY SHOULD I VOTE?
I reject the moral tone of the arguments thrown out in the media that one must vote. Doesn't a right to vote come with a right not to vote? My decision to not vote, is an informed one and not taken lightly. Under the system we have, it's a result particular to my geographical circumstance of living in safe riding. If that should change or I move to a swing riding, I would definitely vote as it would make a difference.
Moreover I will continue to support electoral reform.
I am now much more sympathetic to young voters who seem to see nothing in elections for them.
Any thoughts pro or con about my reasoning here?
Your reasoning is relatively sound.
Democracy is a participatory endeavour. A well-designed democracy is strengthened with each additional thoughtful vote cast. Of course the whole electoral reform movement is a response to our understanding that democracy as we are practicing it is broken. Do we stop driving nails with a paperback book? That's a good question.
Not voting gets noticed -- there's perennial angsting about the low voter turnouts. But is not voting articulate? Does it get the message of dissatisfaction across adequately? Some would say no.
In other threads I've been mentioning the "declined ballot" feature of Ontario elections. It's an official means of saying "none of the above". It conveys intent objection. BC doesn't have this feature, I think.
Skeiseid:
A provision to vote "none of the above" or as you say in Ontario "declined ballot" would get me out to do that, because it at least allows me to express my complaint or frustration with the system or selection of candidates. Aside from lobbying in media, community or to politicians ( all of which I believe are worthwhile to varying degrees) to effect changes I'd like to see, with the election my only statement can be to vote ( which is like tacit approval of system), no show or spoil my ballot.
madmax:
you say changes occur when someone shows up at the poll, but that isn't what happens in my riding is it? So how does my wasted vote in my safe riding change anything? Swing ridings when you have a prospect of influence - yes. So again, why should I vote?
Also your position about why help someone who doesn't vote opens a can of worms. Will it creep to help depends upon who you vote for? As well, do I lose my right to complain about the politicians or governing decisions if I didn't vote? I think that's a red herring. If my vote doesn't make any difference anyway, does my voting or not voting change the merits of any criticism I might have?
Clersal, If you vote for the gov't currently in power, can you still critsize them or is it only voting for the opposition that allows for that? I'm still trying to understand how casting a 'wasted' vote or just blindly voting somehow grants you the right to critisize your gov't or allows you to become worthy enough of someone caring enough to help you.
How does someone that refuses to vote but takes the time to understand the issues/policies/parties/candidates and discuess on a meaningful level have any less right to critisize the gov't than someone that marks an x and blissfully ignores it for the following 4 years? It's meaningful participation within the democracy that grants you these rights, not simply the marking of an X on some ballot. As far as I'm concerned Clersal, all your position does is perpetuate the moral arguements in the OP...making a wasted x grants you no extra moral highground in critisizing your gov't.
"I have never had a vote and I have raised bell all over this country! You don't need a vote to raise hell! You need convictions and a voice!" -Mother Jones
My point is that is you don't vote.Stay home and read a book or watch television don't complain.
Whether you vote for the one in power, or none of the above, complain like mad. That to me is a legitimate reason to complain.
So the right to complain is still dependant on a 'wasted' act? That seems similar to needing to unlock and re-lock the door 8 times every time you want to exit your home
STV wasn't blocked by party structure, it was the fact that close to 50% didn't think it was worth showing up for and marking a ballot.
Revisionist nonsense. The major parties and the major media were indifferent or outright hostile to STV because it threatened the status quo. This allowed a bunch of insiders to run a negative campaign that made it impossible to get solid information for all but the most diligent who were willing to invest considerable time doing so.
Perhaps we need to make voting MANDATORY.
Bill Tieleman is advocating this - are you his shill? Advocating a law to fix something when you don't even understand the problem is a fascist tendency.
How does someone that refuses to vote but takes the time to understand the issues/policies/parties/candidates and discuess on a meaningful level have any less right to critisize the gov't than someone that marks an x and blissfully ignores it for the following 4 years? It's meaningful participation within the democracy that grants you these rights, not simply the marking of an X on some ballot. As far as I'm concerned Clersal, all your position does is perpetuate the moral arguements in the OP...making a wasted x grants you no extra moral highground in critisizing your gov't.
And if you can make common cause with other disaffected voters and spoil your ballots in a similar fashion, so much the better.
So the right to complain is still dependant on a 'wasted' act? That seems similar to needing to unlock and re-lock the door 8 times every time you want to exit your home
I presume you mean 'none of the above'. Not wasted at all. You are saying, and if enough people said it maybe something would change. None of the above is a positive vote it just seems wasted to some.Heh, have half-assed persued that line of thought in the past too Reefer...managed to get a decent number of people that would have normally been non-voters agree to cast a ballot for the write in of 'Big Bird' one provincial election (theres a long story behind why we'd use big bird ^^) , though I doubt many of them actually did.
Perhaps next election it will be worthwhile organizing all these rejection ballots so we all write in the same statement of rejection country wide?
Right now I'm leaning towards not voting. It may not be articulate but I think it's the one that gets the most effect in the context of an election. It's really like a boycott of the system. Spoiling a ballot is too ambiguous. I always think of spoiled ballots as the voter made a mistake.
As for the argument that you impliedly agree with the result by one's abstention. I don't agree. Silence (ie not voting) doesn't mean you agree. That's like asking someone for response, and if they fail to reply you deem it as a positive response.
I realize not voting will set an example to be explained and justified to younger members of my family, but hey, it'll be an instruction moment. Better to have nuanced exploration of these issues than usual mindless sentimental pap that it's a duty to vote.
The one argument that does give pause is that people died for the right to vote or are dying literally to get it elsewhere. That is a serious argument. But it's strength is a function of the value of the vote, so it's based on the assumption the vote is effective. I say to give that sacrifice the significance it deserves, the vote has to be effective which for the majority of votes cast in Canada, it isn't.
To be true to and honour those sacrifices - one doesn't just mindlessly do a useless act of voting - one has to work to make the vote effective, like we tried with STV. So now it will be, unfortunately, decades more lobbying as well as a boycott if that is what it takes to get peoples' attention
How does someone that refuses to vote but takes the time to understand the issues/policies/parties/candidates and discuess on a meaningful level have any less right to critisize the gov't than someone that marks an x and blissfully ignores it for the following 4 years? It's meaningful participation within the democracy that grants you these rights, not simply the marking of an X on some ballot. As far as I'm concerned Clersal, all your position does is perpetuate the moral arguements in the OP...making a wasted x grants you no extra moral highground in critisizing your gov't.
And if you can make common cause with other disaffected voters and spoil your ballots in a similar fashion, so much the better.
ReeferM:
I didn't think we were arguing but...
Did you read my last post in that thread? I wasn't sure you understood what I meant by a declined ballot.
thc:
Your heart seems to be in the right place and therefore, you are feeling the full measure of frustration that many Canadians exerience with respect to politics and voting.
Let your conscience be your guide.
ReeferM:
I didn't think we were arguing but...
Did you read my last post in that thread? I wasn't sure you understood what I meant by a declined ballot.
Right you are. 
I was using the word "arguing" in the debate sense, not the antagonistic sense. But it was actually more of a discussion.
I did read it and I think I understand it. I have a few difficulties with it:
- It's not available to me in BC
- As I understand the process, it's a public declaration, not a secret ballot. A lot of people will be uncomfortable with that.
- It still doesn't make a clear statement.
Right now I'm leaning towards not voting. It may not be articulate but I think it's the one that gets the most effect in the context of an election. It's really like a boycott of the system. Spoiling a ballot is too ambiguous. I always think of spoiled ballots as the voter made a mistake.
Yes, a spoiled ballot could be interpreted as a mistake. But a withheld ballot is often interpreted as someone who is too lazy or apathetic to get off the couch and go to the polling booth. In which camp would you rather be? And in BC, there is already a call to make voting mandatory. I can see that being the outcome of people not voting.
The voter turnout in this BC election is a full 10 percentage points less than the 2005 election. That's about 300,000 people! And yet, people are just scratching their heads and wondering why. There will be some follow up but I don't think this is going to spark huge change, particularly after the failure of BC-STV. If Bill Tieleman has his way, it will be illegal not to vote.
Now, if those 300,000 people had each gone to the polling station and marked their ballot "DEMOCRACY IS DEAD", it would certainly be headline news in BC. It would probably make the national news and perhaps even the international news. The politicians would take notice because these people have shown that they are willing to do more than just stay home. There is nothing politicians fear more than an engaged population.
Anyway, that's my 2 cents. Good luck.
And don't let anyone guilt you into voting for someone or something you don't believe in.
Reefer:
I fully concur with your last statement above.
You are right about the declined ballot except... that it can make a clear statement for a grassroots boycott where the "grassroots" state their intentions beforehand. Remember I proposed this as the instrument of an organized protest.
In Ontario, there is a faily constant "background level" of declined ballots -- around 2000 ballots cast. Only twice in available recorded history has that level changed, once in 1990 and then during the last provincial election after I got letters published in the newspapers advocating voters to decline their ballots in the referendum to say no to MMP while declaring a desire for electoral reform.
There's a power there to articulate.
And, in terms of a public declaration you don't have to jump up and down shouting -- I used a normal voice and no one except the returnig officer was aware. That's not a problem, really.
Reefer
I acknowledge your point - which is the lesser evil stereotype? Spoil a ballot - people will assume you're incompetent and can't fill out a ballot or abstain and you'll likely be branded apathetic. Your idea of specific mass protest to spoil is neat and worth a try but only if reasonable chance gov't will confirm or publish results of intentional spoilage. The campaign for specific spoilage in advance of vote may help. Can't help feeling though that organizing non-voters who don't vote for a myriad of reasons might be akin to herding apathetic cats. Worth thinking about. Guerrilla campaign may be the way to go.
thc:
There are precedents for successful grassroots endeavours.
There's hope. We aren't giving up just yet.
Whigs and Tories dont care about Canadians who dont vote. They already ignore the large percentage of registered voters who dont vote as things stand now.
They know that their obsolete electoral system invented before electricity is still effective for maintaining low voter turnouts and creating millions of wasted votes as things are now. So this refuse to vote idea is not new at all - it's built into the obsolete FPP electoral system. In fact, Canada's Whigs n' Tories have counted on people not voting and on wasted votes for a long time. Wasted votes and no-shows have the combined effect to instill even more power into the hands of those who have it.
Firstly, you'd have to assume that all 300,000 of them fully understand why it is they did not vote in the first place. You would have to inform all of the democracy is dead interest group as to the flawed nature of FPP electoral system before they could be motivated to get out the democracy is dead spoiled ballots. And then youre likely to lose some percentage of them to the electoral reform for PR movement. And some of them might even become motivated voters as an end result.
Firstly, you'd have to assume that all 300,000 of them fully understand why it is they did not vote in the first place. You would have to inform all of the democracy is dead interest group as to the flawed nature of FPP electoral system before they could be motivated to get out the democracy is dead spoiled ballots. And then youre likely to lose some percentage of them to the electoral reform for PR movement. And some of them might even become motivated voters as an end result.
Your basic point is well taken, Fidel. You're not going to get all 300,000. But you might get some of the other 1.2 million non-voters as well.
My basic premise is this:
In 2005, there were under 12,000 spoiled ballots vs. something like 1.2 million non-voters. It may take more effort but I believe that if you want to make a statement, it would be better to focus on the spoiled ballots. 12,000 people could double the spoiled ballot vote but 120,000 non-voters would only add only 10% to that count. And if you get people to spoil them in a similar, obvious fashion, the counters will notice that. Non-votes are all exactly the same.
RM:
You'd have to get the counters to go public with that -- they'd have to bring those results out into the open. Otherwise your efforts will stay in the back room.
I suspect that they agree to abide by rules about disclosure that would preclude reporting to the public on pain of dismissal or worse.
In othe words you'd need an inside man -- lots of them actually -- who would be useful on a one-time basis.
RM:
You'd have to get the counters to go public with that -- they'd have to bring those results out into the open. Otherwise your efforts will stay in the back room.
I suspect that they agree to abide by rules about disclosure that would preclude reporting to the public on pain of dismissal or worse.
In othe words you'd need an inside man -- lots of them actually -- who would be useful on a one-time basis.
I don't think so.
If you're going to run something like this, you build support and then announce publicly what you're going to do. You're going to need some significant support base before you make the public announcement or it won't get picked up. If you're successful and it does get picked up, two things are going to happen. One is you'll be attacked by power brokers as an enemy of democracy. The other is that people will want to join you. Hopefully, the losses you take on the first will be more than offset by gains from the second.
Elections BC tracks ballots down to the voting area which is usually a few hundred votes. Right now there are so few spoiled ballots (relative to valid ones) that if there were a big spike, you could make a convincing claim that anything out of the ordinary were protest votes. BC Elections would have to prove they weren't.
It's a solid plan. You just need someone with the organizational skills, charisma and contacts to carry it out. Sadly, I'm 0 for 3.
You already have a large group of non-voters - that 42% or so who didnt vote in last year's federal election, and similar stats for previous elections. So in order to get them anywhere near a voting booth on election day for them to cast a DiD ballot, youll have to: 1) identify problems with FPTP so as everyone's on the same page 2) communicate with potential Dem is Dead ballot spoilers in some way so as to coordinate efforts on election days
It's either that or youll have to target every potential voter everywhere in order to stop them in their tracks from voting, and convince die-harders not to vote Liberal or Tory or NDP or whatever as religiously as theyve done all their voting age lives. But it also sounds like a variation on the voting strategically for an anyone but that party's candidates meme, which is a leap of faith a lot of people arent willing to take. A lot of people will tell you to go chase your tail and even, it's none of your damned business who for or even whether I vote. Could be a tough crowd out there. The truth about Canada's obsolete electoral system should be an easier sell than simply, "I command you not to vote on election day", without providing some pretty darned good reasons as to why they shouldnt. And that pro-democracy group already exists: http://www.fairvote.ca
In BC, that number is currently 52%. That's right, if you could attract them all, you would have a commanding majority government under FPTP. Then you could simply dispense with the referendum and impose whatever form of electoral system you bloody well wanted. 
I think the Dem is Done movement needs to write a goal statment first and foremost. Otherwise it's going nowhere even faster than BCSTV.
RM:
There's no question you have to be very public -- that's the only way to mobilize the disobedience.
It's like the civil rights movement.
I think the Dem is Done movement needs to write a goal statment first and foremost. Otherwise it's going nowhere even faster than BCSTV.
I don't think there is a movement at the moment. I'm just trying to make the point that spoiled ballots could be a more effective form of protest than abstaining.
The analogy is good, though. If there were such a movement, it would be undermined by the same types of people with the same types of dishonesty.
I think the Dem is Done movement needs to write a goal statment first and foremost. Otherwise it's going nowhere even faster than BCSTV.
I don't think there is a movement at the moment. I'm just trying to make the point that spoiled ballots could be a more effective form of protest than abstaining.
The analogy is good, though. If there were such a movement, it would be undermined by the same types of people with the same types of dishonesty.
As I was saying, there already exists a large group of non-voting Canadians. More than 9, 500, 000 voting aged Canadians cast no ballots in the October 14th election. Most of your work is done as far as this group is concerned. And there are no concerted efforts by Bay Street or their hirelings in Ottawa and Queen's Parks to force those Canadians into challenging the greying support base of old line party voters who choose government every four years whether the weather is snow, rain or shine.
And similarly, none of the Bay Streeters or their hirelings in government are concerned about the more than 7,000, 000 wasted votes in the last federal election. And they couldnt care less about the millions of wasted votes provincial elections produce with our least efficient and mathematically abhorrent FPTP electoral system invented before electricity.
So you would have two large and general groups of Canadians to appeal to with such a campaign: the non-voters and the those whose votes are systematically and methodically flushed down the garbage chute due to an electoral system which punishes anywhere from 45% to 55% of voters for voting in any given federal or provincial election. It would be unclear to your new Dem is Dead campaign how many of the large non-voting group are even aware of the details as to why they dont vote. Those people will need reason and motivation to go anywhere near a polling station of any kind on election day. And some percentage of the perpetual wasted voter's group will already know why their efforts on election day are futile. They might be even more difficult to convince they should deliberately spoil their ballots on the one and only day their voice counts for anything every four years in this northern resource colony, this frozen Puerto Rico.
I think that prosperous cold war era economies are a thing of the past, and that the two old line parties will rely even moreso on the obsolete electoral system and voter turnouts in Canada ranking somewhere between Fiji's and Benin's participation rates. And our US neighbors will be frustrated by the Obama plutocracy to the point of rebellion at some point. I think that North American pro-democracy movements will suffer a number of setbacks in coming years as the world descends further into liquid war.
When people show up at the polls is when real change starts to happen. When they don't show up at the polls, those who are in power are smiling along with all their supporters.
Why would I care to help someone who doesn't vote???
STV went down, likely because those who supported STV didn't even show up. The purpose of getting something through is by SHOWING UP and voting.
Alll those other wimpy excuses are just that. Propoganda to complain, cry and sit on your hands.
Get off your butt, work harder and get people out to vote.
STV wasn't blocked by party structure, it was the fact that close to 50% didn't think it was worth showing up for and marking a ballot.
Those people are the same people who didn't show up to vote for a political party in the election.
Perhaps we need to make voting MANDATORY.
double post, oops
I live in a province thats basically a set of safe seats. Safe enough that other parties won't even bother to campaign here (or "hey, our parties leader managed to make it within 300km of your riding once in the past 8 years, thats enough right?"). Voting here is quite useless
I'm at odds with the some of policies of any gov't we could elect anyway...elections are more like watching people choose who I get to fight next.
So ya, I agree with you thc
Madmax
So only the act of showing up once every 4 years, blindfolded for additional fun, to mark some X on a peice of paper suddenly implies they become worthy or your help? If I showed up at your house once a decade to leave a finger smudge on your window, would that be worthy of your love?