Democracy: Success or Failure

[Patroklos]

Why universal sufferage is better than a restriced on the model I described.

-Pat

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Tripledoc
Also if the EU was indeed a democracy I doubt if GMO foods would ever be allowed in Europe. That would mean a loss for American farmers. Think of the consequences.

The US would continue to subsidize its farmers and so would we.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Right now voting rights AND citizenship are worthless, as nothing is nessecary to get it besides bieng born in the right place at the right time. Teere is a reason why people don't vote (America) and why you actually have to make it required b law in other countries to get people to.

This is coming from an "intellectual ****er of the uni" who happened to study the question.

1) Few democratic countries force their population to vote. Belgium does that. NL used to, but doesn't anymore. That's about everything I can think of.

2) There are very high differences between participatory levels. In Malta, participation is on average 94-95%. In Australia, it is only a bit smaller. In most countries, participation is about 60-80% In the US and in Switzerland, it is 50%.
You believe the situation is similar in every country as in the US, but this is a misconception.

3) There are a variety of reasons that have been discovered that could explain lack of participation. Distrust of the parties, lack of stake in the election, weaker party bonds... you name it.
To believe there is ONE reason, or even one superior reason explaining the lack of participation is also a misconception. It's common to believe that one cause can explain an effect as a whole but it simply ain't true.
Else, explain me why almost all the Aussies go to polls, despite not being forced to, and despite they get the right to vote "just by chance" ?

[C0ckney]

i'm pretty sure voting is mandatory is austrailia, which perhaps explains why they get such a high turn out

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by C0ckney
i'm pretty sure voting is mandatory is austrailia, which perhaps explains why they get such a high turn out

Oh ok. Then what about the Maltese, or the Austrians?

[Patroklos]

The Maltese and the Austrians haven't been voting very long, plus it isn't too hard to motivate a small population to vote, as their vote is more than .000001% (maybe too may zeros there) of the decision. I stated above mass democracy works in a small state, but fewer states can be classed in that category as time goes on.

Australia has legeslated voting.

-Pat

[Spiffor]

I guess Switzerland and its 50% is a gigantic state then

[David Floyd]

Why universal sufferage is better than a restriced on the model I described.

Better in what way? Not letting poor people and old people vote would be better, in that it would largely prevent social welfare programs, so I'd be all for that, EXCEPT that it would not be free.

Universal suffrage, then, is better because it is the most free system of voting.

The institution of voting, in itself, is not what I am primarily concerned with. I am primarily concerned with liberty, and if the institution of voting happens to exist, then it should exist in a manner consistent with liberty.

[Az]

Originally posted by yavoon


economics is inexorably linked to human behavior. so I don't see how u plan on making it purely deterministic.

Only the consumer part of them. and in those cases, demand and preference for products can be seen the same way it's predicted today, through test groups, etc.

[Whaleboy]

Compulsory voting:

If people have so little interest in the way their lives are run that they can't be bothered to vote (as opposed to making a conscious decision not to, as in my case as of recently), then I dread to think of who they would vote for were they forced to!