this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
115 points (94.6% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26778 readers
1555 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] TheIvoryTower@lemmy.world 115 points 10 months ago (21 children)

All the people saying mandatory voting is bad are misinformed. It is essential for democracy, and should be applied everywhere.

Australia has mandatory voter turnout, but you do not need to submit a vote. You just need to show up on polling day.

Everyone has political interests and needs to be politically represented, but some people are too tired after work to take themselves to the polling centre. Others are incarcerated. If anything, those people are more in need of political representatives.

American conservatives spend billions trying to prevent poor overworked people from reaching polling places or exercising their right to vote. Mandatory voting prevents that.

Make no mistake, Australian democracy is healtheir than whatever clusterfuck in going on in the US.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 55 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not only that, but Australia's actual ballot is leagues better, too. Ranked ballots are a great way to weaken (unfortunately not eliminate) the two party system, which is unfortunately also the reason the United States will never see anything like it. (At least not in the foreseeable future.)

[–] naevaTheRat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yeah we do have single member seats in the lower house though which is a completely broken system.

Most of Europe recognises that, our frienemies across the ditch recognise that.

Consensus seeking and coalitions are much more representative forms of government than single member winner takes all seats.

[–] Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone 2 points 10 months ago

Yep, this is why the Senate is much more representative, and why the big parties who control the House of Representatives hate it so much.

[–] Balthazar@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Whether mandatory voting is bad or not, certainly it's way better than the American situation, where one particular party's strategy to win elections is to discourage and actively prevent people from voting. In Australia, every political party seeks to win by collecting votes.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago

Yeah I hate the fact that one party’s strategy is actively invalidating votes for one of the candidates.

[–] tourist@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I don't pay too much attention to Australian politics, but whenever I see headlines it's always something like "MP literally destroying the barrier reef with his own bare hands" or "Corruption whistleblower sentenced to one thousand years in jail"

[–] vantlem@lemmy.world 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The important thing to note is: Australia has a genuinely solid chance of removing the right-wing nutjobs / spineless centrist two-party system BECAUSE of mandatory voting. Young people in USA have appalling voter turn out. But young people in Australia are seriously turning the tides. See the results by age group for the 2019 election. The boomers are still voting in right-wing nutjobs (Liberal party), most groups have strong centrist representation (Labor), and Gen Z are bringing in a third, non-major, left-aligned party (Greens). It brings so much hope for younger generations and the fact that voting doesn't feel futile.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] EurekaStockade@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

Things like "MP approves funding for new hospital" don't make headlines. Even moreso for any world headlines to rise above the din of American politics it usually has to be something pretty outrageous.

[–] AsslessChaps@lemmynsfw.com 4 points 10 months ago

It’s because you do hear about it. We recently had an mp forced to retire because they could control policy over something his mother has shares in.

[–] Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone 3 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Australia has mandatory voter turnout, but you do not need to submit a vote. You just need to show up on polling day.

So just to clear up a technical misconception here - the wording in the Electoral Act is quite clear. All enrolled electors are legally required to vote. It's only a consequence of the secret ballot that makes this provision unenforceable, so someone can turn up and get their name marked off while not submitting a vote without facing any consequences, but it is technically an illegal act.

If the AEC were to come up with some way to determine that you didn't vote without betraying that secret ballot, they would be within their rights to issue a you a fine.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Found this online:

According to the Australian Electoral Commission, the decline in voter turnout was the driving force behind the introduction of mandatory voting. It said that voter turnout dropped from 71 per cent in the 1919 election to less than 60 per cent in the 1922 elections.

In order to address the problem, a private member’s bill to amend the Electoral Act was introduced in the Senate in 1924. At the time, it was only the third private member’s bill to be passed into law since 1901.

As a result of the law, the voter turnout at the 1925 election rose to over 91 per cent.

Gradually, states across the country introduced compulsory voting starting from Victoria in 1926, New South Wales and Tasmania in 1928, Western Australia in 1936 and South Australia in 1942.

When enrollment and voting at federal elections was introduced for Australian Aborigines in 1949 it was voluntary, and continued to be so until 1984 when enrollment and voting became compulsory for all eligible electors.

[–] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Oh wow here in America we have party that banks on reducing turnout

[–] Lafari@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (9 children)

In order words, why is voting mandatory in Australia, but not UK, US, Canada or New Zealand?

[–] spittingimage@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (11 children)

Maybe it should be mandatory in the US. It would make voter suppression harder, if not impossible.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Because FREEDOM!

Eagle screams in the background

ETA: Fires guns "YEEHAW!"

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@sh.itjust.works 13 points 10 months ago (2 children)

FYI: eagles don't really scream. That fake scream from movies/tv, etc. is from a red tailed hawk.

[–] TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I know, but I had to be as stereotypical as possible.

[–] Darkenfolk@dormi.zone 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not enough guns and yeehaw noises. 3 out of 10.

[–] TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] alquicksilver@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That response loses you another point. Should've threatened to bring in the cavalry!

[–] TheDoctorDonna@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

I'm too Canadian for this, sorry!

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

It's easier to get a recording of a hawk that never shuts up. Eagles let out a screech too, but not often. Try stealing a fish from a bald eagle. Bring a tape recorder...and some bandages.

[–] Thatsalotofpotatoes@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Because it's a terrible idea? Elections are already heavily weighted towards name recognition. What are people who can't even be bothered to go out to vote going to offer to the process?

[–] Gigan@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (2 children)

That's true, you can require them to vote, but you can't require them to be informed.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Bad news though. Almost none of today's voters are properly informed either.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

That’s a very good argument.

[–] TheGalacticVoid@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago (2 children)

The alternative is voter suppression, which leads to unequal access. Also, given that more passionate individuals are gonna seek out a ballot vs. others, the result is going to be skewed in favor of those passionate people regardless of their understanding of reality or truthfullness.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] neptune@dmv.social 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure in Australia you can just turn in a blank ballot. But yeah, compulsory voting is kind of odd.

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 19 points 10 months ago

It's the simplest solution to fight voter disenfranchisement. It stops parties from trying to play that particular stupid game.

[–] pirrrrrrrr@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 10 months ago

We get the option to vote by mail for free weeks in advance.

You don't even have to get off your fat arse.

[–] Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone 4 points 10 months ago

It forces politics to the centre. Parties put a huge amount of effort into 'bringing out the vote', and do things to appeal to the fringe which is how you get characters like Trump finding success. When this isn't a concern, parties can focus on policies that appeal to the majority of people rather than fringe groups that they can use to guarantee voter turnout.

[–] eatthecake@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Motivating people to vote, in the US at least, seems like a process of whipping up fear and anger. I would argue that taking away the need to motivate people in tbis way is a positive for everyone. It also results in a more representative and legitimate government.

[–] Thatsalotofpotatoes@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

The fear and anger is to get people to vote for them. That wouldn't go away under mandatory voting. Unfortunately, unless we can find a way to resolve the culture war that has spread globally now, that will always be an easy exploit

load more comments
view more: next ›