• SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Mandatory voting just adds semi-random votes, skewing the proportion of people who are really voting for their own interests, but rather out of vibes due to obligation. Holiday on voting days and repealing of disenfranchisement measures work much better.

    • MisterFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      The reason I think mandatory voting in Australia is nice (tiny fine for not doing it, so turn out is like 85-95% every time) is that because everyone obliged, it keeps voter disenfranchisement politically difficult. When you go to vote on election day, you wait 20 mins, tops, usually less, and you can vote ahead of time via mail or in person. It’s always Saturday for this reason too.

      I’d argue it’s this easy partially because everyone HAS to do it, so if politicians start making it hard, people are gonna be pissed very quickly, so no one messes with the well-oiled machine.

      And there are no stupid “get out to vote campaigns” wasting valuable headspace where instead we could be talking about actually issues.

      Australia’s electoral system is far from perfect (single member local electorates which basically guarantees two stronger parties), but mandatory voting is definitely a feature I do not want to be rid of.

      • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        it keeps voter disenfranchisement politically difficult

        Voter disenfranchisement, and mandatory voting are mutually exclusive concepts. One does not have the right to vote if they are forced to vote. Having a right encompasses the freedom of choice.

    • yarr@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      9 months ago

      One minor twist: the legislation mandates that one reports to the polling center. The uninformed can select “none of the above” if they are not sure what would be best.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        9 months ago

        I think it would still encourage meme voting in retaliation for having to show up. “You can force me to do this but you can’t force me to do this in good faith.”

        • yarr@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          9 months ago

          If the worst you can say about this scheme is: “people may vote randomly” I don’t feel that bad. I assume the amount of people that spite vote(!) would be greatly outnumbered by people that actually give a shit (but who may not be able to vote today, due to work obligations)

    • Couldbealeotard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 months ago

      It doesn’t “just” do that. It totally reverses the ability for governments to block people from voting. If it’s an obligation then people must be provided a reasonable chance to vote. It makes more people engaged in politics as well instead of “can’t be bothered”