Voting should be compulsory

Thank you for presenting your arguments. ==Rebuttal - Voting is a Responsibility== Many of the other examples you provide could be debated on their own merits and demerits, but I don't want to devolve into a kritik about the legitimacy of the state in general. What I will point out is that this is an issue of speech and political association and that whether voting "is the entirely of democracy" (something I would dispute as democracy is also about structure of government in other respects, a certain from of legal system, certain fundamental principles, etc) or not, not everyone believes in democracy. Our society is supposed to value expression as a right, and compulsory voting contradicts that with the threat of force. ==Rebuttal - Low Voter Turnout/Under-representation== I would posit that if a citizen is uninformed, apathetic or disenfranchised, it is better for them not to participate in an election than to cast votes on random or unfounded grounds (as I referenced in my opening statement). I reject the assumption that low voter turnout is inherently a bad thing or high voter turnout is inherently a good thing. What matters moreso is that those who do vote make informed and cogent choices. ==Rebuttal - Catering to Interest Groups and Specific Demographics== My response to this is simple; if certain demographics receive less attention from policy makers than others on the basis that said demographics vote in lower numbers, they can combat this by reversing their voting trends and demonstrating that they are a powerful demographic. Further, compulsory voting would not eliminate this concern, only shift what demographics politicians would need to cater to. The focus would simply no longer be what demographics are most likely to vote, but the raw numbers comprising the whole population of various demographics. In other words, instead of appealing to interest groups with high voter turnout, they would appeal to the largest demographics, period. ==Rebuttal - Fringe Voters Over-represented under Voluntary Voting== I find this argument to be particularly off base, especially when you cite the United States as a supporting example. Among the most common criticisms of two-party systems is that they stifle debate and encourage voter apathy precisely because they necessarily must present "mainstream" platforms and ignore alternate views that fall outside majority belief systems (1)(2). I would further state that what constitutes "fringe" or "extreme" political views is inherently subjective, those labels do not make the beliefs in question wrong, and I reject the underlying assumption that it is an inherently bad thing for people with non-mainstream belief systems to vote in greater proportions than others. ==Rebuttal - "Leaving voting optional will create a system in which a majority of citizens' voices are entirely unheard."== Coercing someone into either spoiling a ballot or casting it for someone they wouldn't voluntarily wish to vote for is not letting them have their voice heard. Freedom of speech necessarily entails the freedom not to speak when one doesn't wish to. (1) http://academic.regis.edu... (2) https://www.boundless.com...?