• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    8 days ago

    If you can’t abstain then you don’t have a democracy. (Yes Australia i’m looking at you) You have a system of coerced consent where the political parties wouldn’t even know how to change, but that’s okay because there’s no incentive to change in such a system either.

    It’s literally the fastest way to get Party AB instead of Party A and Party B.

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      8 days ago

      Great you started with the conclusion that not voting is fine and then tried to find a way to justify it. You failed.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        I’m not going to write a 20 page paper for you. This is what it is. If people have to vote then the sitting parties have no reason to respond to voters.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        Write ins aren’t actually a free for all in most states. You have to qualify with signatures for the state to bother counting them. So no, not really.

    • WrenFeathers@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 days ago

      Look up what “ideal” means, and note that it doesn’t mean “only option.”

      You specifically chose the word. I am responding to that. And to that end: Not participating in an election is NOT an ideal way to have a democracy. In fact- it flies is the face of it.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        So in political philosophy ideals are only related to the common definition. This wiki page gives a good use of the philosophical definition in action.

        I probably should have used a different word on Lemmy though.