good idea/bad idea, necessary democratic reform or authoritarian imposition? are there better or worse ways to do it?

  • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    14 days ago

    australia has compulsory voting and id say that most people here would not describe it as “invasive” - it is, in fact, a source of national pride

    we have early voting, mail in ballots, etc too so people are enabled to vote however is easiest and you can not vote, but you have to submit a vote

    • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      There are also countries with mandatory military service for all citizens where people there have a positive impression of the program and feel national pride about it, but I don’t think that necessarily means it is a good practice. I think anything the government is forcing people to do should meet a high bar of not being able to accomplish the same thing any other way, because freedom is important, whether or not people know to value it.

      • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        12 days ago

        why do you think mandatory military service isn’t a good idea?

        why are you judging peoples countries based on your view that governments shouldn’t force people to do things?

        in fact you’re judging peoples’ lived experience and opinions based entirely on your own narrow views of government

        mandatory military service might mean fewer wars if people understood better what that meant

        my government (australia) is, all in all, a good thing - them telling people in this country to do things is, again all in all, a good thing. we live in a society, and the world has different people with different opinions and different ways of viewing the world and doing things

        am i privileged to have a government that i can trust? sure! no denying that… but mistrust of the government is not a reason to write off the entire concept of societal mandates

        yknow what else is good? taxes, fire services, disaster response, and dare i say - public healthcare and ambulances… all things im mandated to pay for along with everyone around me in case we ever need them

        • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          12 days ago

          why are you judging peoples countries based on your view that governments shouldn’t force people to do things?

          Because that’s what this thread is for, sharing thoughts on compulsory voting.

          in fact you’re judging peoples’ lived experience and opinions based entirely on your own narrow views of government

          Rather I’m saying that just because people approve of something doesn’t mean it’s good. If you think governments forcing people to do things is something to be embraced in general, and your lived experience with it is positive, that’s your opinion, which is fine, but it doesn’t mean that opinion is right.

          yknow what else is good? taxes, fire services, disaster response, and dare i say - public healthcare and ambulances… all things im mandated to pay for along with everyone around me in case we ever need them

          Agreed, but I think you’re papering over some important nuance in the position I’m expressing here. I see this sort of compulsory taxation and what it buys as an example of something where the need outweighs the harm. It is ok because of how important these services are, and despite the lesser harm of making people slightly less free. If all taxes rather went to building golden statues of the president, they would be bad.

          My argument against compulsory voting is premised on the idea that reduced freedom is a harm, and must be justified by some good that sufficiently outweighs it. I haven’t made an argument supporting that premise, but I think it’s a sufficiently intuitive and popular sentiment that I shouldn’t have to. If you disagree with that premise, I think that just means we have very different values.