In a deomcracy, voting ought to be compulsory.

Before presenting my arguments, I would like to define several terms in the debate motion. Debate Motion: In a Democratic State, voting ought to be compulsory. Burden of Proof: In a Democratic State, voting ought to be compulsory. But then my friends, what is democracy? An acceptable and simple definition of democracy is this: we choose who rules us. However, there are many faults with this definition; under fascism, the people chose who ruled them by participating in a harsh revolution. Fascism is definitely not democracy; with this said, what is then “democracy”? Abraham Lincoln defined Democracy as a “government of the people, by the people, for the people” [1] Oxford Dictionary defines as “a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state” [2] With two definitions of democracy stating that democracy is chosen by the “people” which usually means the whole population, as stated in the Oxford definition. With these definitions, we could exclude “representative democracies” because in representative democracies, the people don’t choose the head of state directly. This debate will be based purely upon direct democracies only, such as that of Athens, or Switzerland. Therefore, whenever I mention democracy, I refer to direct democracy. Voting is defined by Merriam-Webster Dictionary as “a way of usually formal expression of opinion or will in response to a proposed decision; especially one given as an indication of approval or disapproval of a proposal, motion, or candidate for office” [3] Therefore, we would rightfully include voting in plebiscites, referendums and so forth (not limiting it to only head of state voting) Compulsory is defined as (by the Merriam Webster Dictionary) “required by law/rule” An antonym to voluntary, which means not required by law/rule. Therefore, we can exclude the voting systems of many representative democracies. Argument One: Compulsory voting is democratic P1. All definitions of democracy states that democracy is a government elected by the people P2. In many democracies, it is a duty (because of democracy’s definitions) to make decisions C1. Not implementing compulsory voting is undemocratic Let us expand on this argument. If country x ought to be as democratic as, say, Athens, the cradle of democracy, then country x must implement compulsory voting. Many democratic philosophers know well; Athens was an unequivocally democratic state which did particularly well during its existence. Athenians held that it was every citizen’s duty, as a citizen of a democratic state, to participate in decision making. Those who refused to do so faced heavy fines; it was a duty of every citizen to vote [4]. A democracy only functions best when the government is truly representative of the decisions made; it functions best when the citizens themselves debate with each other and make decisions based upon the thoughts of the entire community. In some democratic communities, voting turnout can be low; in some cases, less than half of the eligible voting population elects a leader. This leads to a lack of votes; for example, if country x has y number of eligible voters, and ½ of y (eligible voters) decided to vote, then the head of state elected wouldn’t be democratically elected, but elected by a half of the nation; this was what happened in the United States of America, where 43% of all eligible voters decided to stay home in 2012 [5], and on a larger scale, Thailand, in which 46.79% of the population came out to vote during the 2014 February Elections [6]. We have also extended the limits of compulsory voting to not only presidential/prime ministerial voting, but plebiscites; 100 or close to 100% turnout in plebiscites could be a matter of death/life; if the death penalty was to be repealed, but say 30-40% of the voting population decided to vote, and the result was that it shouldn’t be repealed, then the lives of many would be endangered. Argument Two: Compulsory Voting is Patriotic! 1st Syllogism: P1. All patriots have a duty to express their opinions to save the nation P2. All citizens of democratic states have a duty to vote C1. All voters are patriotic 2nd Syllogism: P1. All people who decided not to vote are either dissatisfied (and don’t want to participate in it) with politics are lazy (most of them are lazier) P2. They have thus adopted the attitude of “Why should I go vote today? ” rather than “How should my nation progress? ” C1. Some people who do not vote are unpatriotic, while others lose their only chance to satisfy themselves with society Quite self-explanatory; what better way to serve your democratic nation than to go vote and voice your opinions for the progress of the nation you have for so long serve? Either one who decides to abstain in expressing their opinions are selfish, or they are unsatisfied. Let us look at both groups now; the unsatisfied section need change. But what change can they do when they have the opportunity to change their respective nations, but decide to resort to other means to do so or decide to keep their mouths shut on the status quo. An example of this would be the Thai People’s Democratic Reform Front, whose tactics of boycotting elections have proven to be very undemocratic in nature. The PDRC have acted very undemocratically; as explained before, a democratic state requires almost complete/high turnout. The PDRC has denied this to Thai voters, giving the nation a shameful 46% turnout rate as explained above. However, those who decide to not vote because they are lazy are then faced with harsher criticism. Expressed briefly through this quote by famous Greek philosopher and historian, Thucidydes (during Pericle’s Funeral Oration) “We do not say that a man who takes no interest in politics is a man who minds his own business; we say that he has no business here at all. ” [7] He says this in high support of the Athenian compulsory voting system. Let us analyze this quote efficiently; a US citizen has the duty of “participating in the democratic process” [8]. The Athenians also thought so too. To not oblige by your duties are unpatriotic in nature; to ignore the duties of your native lands (while living in a democratic state) should be considered a very undemocratic and unwise choice. To not vote because of selfishness is a betrayal to one’s nation; any person who ought not to vote has no business in a democratic society, as they are not living by their obligations as a democratic citizens. Argument Three: Compulsory Voting destroys class barriers by giving voice to the poor 1st Syllogism P1. In some democratic societies, the poor do not give a voice because they have nothing to vote for (so they say) P2. This allows elections to be dominated by the rich elite C1. In a voluntary voting society, the poor do not have a voice 2nd Syllogism P1. All compulsory voting societies require all citizens to vote, never minding their class and all P2. This gives the poor something to vote for C1. In a compulsory voting society, the poor voice their opinions through the ballot box Compulsory voting breaks down class barriers and unite one’s nation by creating a sense of community in which everyone has a voice. In Afghanistan, where class inequality exists highly, a man was once asked “why did you not vote? ” His reply was shocking “I live in a tent with my family. I go to work and earn very little per day. Why should I care about politics? ” His reply, albeit shocking, is very typical of a poor person. A poor person thinks he has no voice; he thinks that we live in a Jeffersonian Democracy, where “the rich’s votes only count” and abides by that law. He thinks that his condition is unchangeable via the ballot box, and many took the radical alternative, the bullet; this explains many revolutions and insurgencies in societies where class differences are high. But we can change this; when the poor are made to understand that their voices count, they would hoard themselves to the ballot boxes. But they can never do so; they are not convinced by the rhetoric-filled voices of suit-clad politicians. They must be coerced to think that their voices actually matter; compulsory voting introduces this. They give a poor a sense that their voice actually counts, and that they were wrong all this time about not voting because “a mice who squeaks in a room filled with shouts squeaks to no avail” CONCLUSION: Compulsory voting is democratic, patriotic and breaks class barriers. We ought to implement it. Citations: [1] . http://www.ait.org.tw... [2] . http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... [3] . http://www.merriam-webster.com... [4] Malkopoulou, Anthoula, Compulsory Voting in Greece: a history of concepts in motion [5] . http://nationalinterest.org... [6] . http://news.yahoo.com... [7] Thucydides, The Peloponnesian Wars, Book 1:22 (Rex Warner translation)