Despite the claims of idiotic groups like Rock the Vote, I've come to the conclusion that low voter turn-out is a good thing. If most people are too preoccupied with living their lives to learn about issues and go vote, that means they're safe and wealthy. Ignorant, maybe, but that they can afford to be speaks of their nation's success.
If such a person gets an inkling to vote and decides to banish their ignorance and contribute to the political process, fantastic. But I'm not at all certain that such a decision is morally commendable or should be encouraged. Politics is an overhead cost associated with society and government, and as such it should occupy as few of our resources as possible.
As for this present election, if you're still undecided then please consider staying home.
Representative government depends on voter turn-out. If fewer people vote, fewer people are having a stake in the process. People vote one way or another depending on how well (or how poorly) they're being represented by elected officials.
I think that everyone should vote... regardless of ideology or political party affiliation.
I also find it interesting that some people encourage voting in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.... but don't think it should be encouraged here.
I've given this a lot of thought and I don't really know where I stand.
I agree with Mark that democracies depend upon voters to function correctly.
But I got an email from a "flaming Liberal" friend of mine encouraging everyone to vote. "Even if you don't know the first thing about politics, even if you vote for a guy based upon the color of his shirt, JUST VOTE."
This, I'm fairly certain, wouldn't help our government function correctly.
It would make the "dumb masses" demographic, which the Vote For Change tour seems to be catering to, easier to manage.
(Please note that I'm not claiming that the "dumb masses" actually exist. It's just what the Springsteen concerts seem to be geared for.)
Some have brought up the issue of passing a law REQUIRING people to vote. Would they also require people to know the issues and give them thought before election day?
I'm just not sure about this one.
Mark: Well, Iraq and Afghanistan aren't mature, functioning democracies like the US is, and that was an important qualifier.
There's some critical mass of people needed to support democracy, but I suspect it's rather low (20%-ish).
murdoc: That's exactly my point.
Usually I would agree with you; uninformed people who don't follow politics in non-election years probably shouldn't vote. This time it's different, however. According to MTV, if they don't vote, they will die. And rape will be legalized.
I wouldn't support a law REQUIRING people to vote, but I do think that voting should be ENCOURAGED.
MW: The importance and relevance of voting doesn't hinge upon the presence of a mature and functioning democracy. Voting is what makes democracies work... government that's elected by the people via fair and equitable voting.
If we're all citizens, we should all have an equal say in who serves in our government. This means that every legal citizen gets one vote. Those who choose not to use their vote have every right to do so. This does not mean, though, that we shouldn't encourage people to vote.
The choice is ultimately that of each individual citizen whether they want to participate or not in our free society.
.. in the voting part of our free society, that is.
I understand your concern over dumb people voting... but to a certain extent, that's irrelevant. That was the original intent of the electoral college.
Even more important than that, though, is the concept of voting as a right. It's not a right that's reserved for those who are savvy on the issues... it's a right that's guaranteed to all citizens.
If I could truly believe that those who don't want "dumb" people to vote were concerned about lack of knowledge instead of, say, labelling them as "dumb" because they're not sufficiently liberal or conservative... then I wouldn't have a problem with saying that dumb people shouldn't vote.
I think that everyone should vote. I don't care if they're voting for who I am or not or what their beliefs are. We're all citizens with a right to vote.
Mark: I don't remember ever arguing that "dumb" people shouldn't be allowed to vote. But I don't think they should be encouraged to vote, that's silly.
MW: I totally agree with you. But I also totally agree, partially(huh?) with Mark that voting should be encouraged.
That said, encouragement is NOT Cameron Diaz telling women to vote if they want rape to remain illegal, paying people in crack cocain to register Mary Poppins and Dick Tracy as Democrats, and a whole host of other silly things that are happening right now. That's why I'm with MW on the low turnout thing.
Encouraging people to vote even if they know nothing and would have to resort to the "flip a coin" method is not encouragement- its irresponsible.
Any encouragement should include a directive to research the issues.
/soapbox
Jim said: "Any encouragement should include a directive to research the issues."
That's what many of these programs do. They encourage people to educate themselves and vote.
Jim said: "Cameron Diaz telling women to vote if they want rape to remain illegal, paying people in crack cocain to register Mary Poppins and Dick Tracy as Democrats"
Would you think it's wrong if they were doing this to get people to register as Republicans?
In any case, those are extreme examples. Extreme examples aren't good representatives.
MW said: " But I don't think they should be encouraged to vote, that's silly"
Fine.
But are you defining "dumb" as: "those who don't share my views"...
..or as being uneducated on the candidates, and issues, and their party's platforms?
"Would you think it's wrong if they were doing this to get people to register as Republicans?"- No, Mark, I'd think it was just fine. C'mon, of course it would be wrong. I'd have a low opinion of any "star" spouting of garbage like that. That question was silly, and took up valuable space you could have used to condemn those acts as irresponsible.
Extreme? What does that have to do with anything? This was on live TV. Do you know how many women watch that show? (I don't, but I can guess). That stunt was most definitely not the kind of encouragement people need.
It is representative of today's voter encouragement trends. And you can add MTV's rock the vote to this list, too. They're trying to scare young people into voting by spreading lies about a return to the military draft.
Well, if you want to talk about lies being spread around, there's plenty to talk about on BOTH sides, Jim.
As for the Cameron Diaz thing, neither I nor most other sensible folks took her comment seriously.
I don't often find myself agreeing with Mark, but I do. Cameron Diaz' comments may not sound very "encouraging", but she does have the right to say whatever damn-fool thing she wants to say on Oprah's show. And if people want to be stupid enough to believe her, that's fine too. And if others want to take me to task for believing people who vote based solely on what Cameron Diaz says are stupid, they can do that too, but they can't make me change my mind. Ain't America great?
More of my opinion here. Everybody's entitled to my opinion!