▲ 114 ▼ Why is Australia the only "core anglosphere" country where voting is mandatory? (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by Lafari@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.world 74 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 child) IDGAF if they're so selfish as to prioritize a moment of wellbeing over civic duty. So yeah, I'm invalidating them. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (1 child) If their civid duty requires them to sacrifice their health, the civic duty is misconstrued. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you talking about feeling too tired to spend 20 minutes voting 3 times every 4 years or cutting out your own heart to give to someone? Cause in the the latter case I agree and in the former I say buck up mate, we live in a society and that means doing stuff for people when we don't always feel like it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Voting quality doesn’t improve with greater turnout. There’s a duty here, if we declare it to be such, but it yields no benefit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So firstly that is a non sequitur. Either we are talking about whether the sacrifice demanded is unethically steep or we are talking whether the initiative is ineffective. Lets put that aside though, just making a note this is a separate point to explore. I would first ask what you mean by voting quality. Could you explain? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] intensely_human@lemm.ee -7 points 2 years ago (1 child) If their civid duty requires them to sacrifice their health, the civic duty is misconstrued. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you talking about feeling too tired to spend 20 minutes voting 3 times every 4 years or cutting out your own heart to give to someone? Cause in the the latter case I agree and in the former I say buck up mate, we live in a society and that means doing stuff for people when we don't always feel like it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Voting quality doesn’t improve with greater turnout. There’s a duty here, if we declare it to be such, but it yields no benefit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So firstly that is a non sequitur. Either we are talking about whether the sacrifice demanded is unethically steep or we are talking whether the initiative is ineffective. Lets put that aside though, just making a note this is a separate point to explore. I would first ask what you mean by voting quality. Could you explain? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) Are you talking about feeling too tired to spend 20 minutes voting 3 times every 4 years or cutting out your own heart to give to someone? Cause in the the latter case I agree and in the former I say buck up mate, we live in a society and that means doing stuff for people when we don't always feel like it. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Voting quality doesn’t improve with greater turnout. There’s a duty here, if we declare it to be such, but it yields no benefit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So firstly that is a non sequitur. Either we are talking about whether the sacrifice demanded is unethically steep or we are talking whether the initiative is ineffective. Lets put that aside though, just making a note this is a separate point to explore. I would first ask what you mean by voting quality. Could you explain? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Voting quality doesn’t improve with greater turnout. There’s a duty here, if we declare it to be such, but it yields no benefit. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So firstly that is a non sequitur. Either we are talking about whether the sacrifice demanded is unethically steep or we are talking whether the initiative is ineffective. Lets put that aside though, just making a note this is a separate point to explore. I would first ask what you mean by voting quality. Could you explain? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) So firstly that is a non sequitur. Either we are talking about whether the sacrifice demanded is unethically steep or we are talking whether the initiative is ineffective. Lets put that aside though, just making a note this is a separate point to explore. I would first ask what you mean by voting quality. Could you explain? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) They mean some people shouldn't vote because their opinion is low quality and should be ignored. It's an anti democratic belief that the stupid/misinformed shouldn't vote. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 years ago I think we should let people say what they mean themselves if we want to understand each other. permalink fedilink source parent