Malygris on 8/5/2007 at 01:30
I think we'd all be far better off with a system that actively prevents most people from voting.
aguywhoplaysthief on 8/5/2007 at 07:42
Quote Posted by jay pettitt
Bollocks. It wasn't the will of ~50% of the populous. It doesn't much matter that 115% turned out to vote (if anything that makes it worse). You can barely sliver a cigarette paper between the level of support for the two different ideologies; yet the end result doesn't even begin to represent that fact. You've been had.
What you're really highlighting here is the problem with powerful federal governments breeding dissatisfaction. France is a large and populous nations with a variety of local interests and regional cultures. While national political margins are often small, when you get to local polling (at least in the U.S.), the political margins widen much more. A government which is closer to smaller groups of people gives the people the government that they want (or think that they want until they get it).
Just one more reason why I am not a fan of large central (and state) governments.
But, of course, I would argue that the simple existence of a strong state is a recipe for greater dissatisfaction with the political system as the costs of losing will be meaningfully felt as the government will actively work against the interests of those on the losing end.
rachel on 8/5/2007 at 09:17
Quote Posted by SD
Being a liberal, I am dead against this. The right to vote also encompasses the right not to vote. I don't agree with forcing people to vote under the pain of fine or jailtime.
The right not to vote is represented by the blank vote. Citizens have rights but they also have duties. Participating in what will essentially shape your country's future should be one of those elementary duties.
That said I know it's a controversial issue. :)
jay pettitt on 8/5/2007 at 13:43
Look out, it's the democracy nazis!!!
