The committed statists of this world,
i.e. the vast majority of people occupying planet Earth, all fervently believe that
applying the force of government Authority! upon everyone all the time is
the answer to every societal “problem.”
Statists create imaginary “problems”
and then try to “solve” them by using force.
The mid-term elections mania in the
U.S. has finally and mercifully concluded, but not for long. Now the frenzied
statists will turn their hysterical attention to the next presidential election
two years from now in 2016.
It never ends.
Democracy as a social activity in America
today has become a lot like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. This
week the Republicans prevailed but it’s highly unlikely that they’ll be able to
save the ship of state from sinking. Instead, the new guys, just like the old
guys, will continue to imagine more and more “problems” to be “solved” by force
while the nation flounders.
CNN published an article entitled “Should Americans be
forced to vote?” and invited several so-called political “experts”
to opine on the question. Not surprisingly, most of them were enthusiastic
about the prospect of mandatory voting laws for Americans. Many nations are
presently forcing their citizens to vote, so why shouldn’t we, they reason?
William Galston, a senior fellow at the Brookings
Institution who holds the Ezra K. Zilkha Chair in its governance studies program
imagines that founding father, James Madison would “be smiling” over the
idea. “Reforming institutions to change incentives is always the most
effective course,” declares Galston. Obviously, this “expert” thinks that
incentives for Americans should be determined by government force.
Gretchen Helmke, associate professor and chairwoman of
the political science department at the University of Rochester, thinks that
American politicians would favor mandatory voting laws only if they thought
such laws would benefit them politically. “Only governing parties with
relatively under-mobilized electorates and a growing opposition find compulsory
voting an attractive option,” she opines. “In other words, the
politicians that will likely determine the rules of the game have no incentive
to change them.”
Haydon Manning, associate professor at Flinders
University's School of Social and Policy Studies in Adelaide, South Australia,
admits that Australians “are required to attend a polling station, and upon
receipt of their ballot, decide to vote or discard it.” Failure to attend
one’s "democratic duty" may incur a small fine if insufficient
excuse is offered. “Surveys consistently indicate that about 70% say they
favor compulsory voting,” he adds, demonstrating that there is no shortage
of statists in the Land Down Under.
“The arguments for compulsory voting seem persuasive.” opines Ari Ratner, a fellow at New America Foundation.
“Yet, mandatory voting is ill-suited to America's current realities… Mandatory
voting would be a bureaucratic and legal nightmare. Not to mention that
refusing to vote itself can be an important form of protest.”
That’s right Mr. Ratner, but I think the better answer is
that forcing Americans to vote is simply unconstitutional. None of the “experts”
thought of that. What about the concept of liberty?
“You have to pay taxes, so why not have to vote? reasons Donna Brazile, CNN contributor, Democratic strategist, nationally
syndicated columnist, and adjunct professor at Georgetown University. “I've
come to favor mandatory voting… voting is the essential, central and
indispensable feature of democracy. We require jury attendance, paying taxes,
and public education attendance because those are also essential functions. Is
voting less important?
Yes, the United Statists of America have succeeded in
forcing a lot of unconstitutional obligations upon “free” Americans; why not
just one more?
That’s statist style democracy.
No comments:
Post a Comment