The fundamental tenet of a working democracy is voting. Everyone should have a vote and everyone should exercise their right to vote. To that end we have been seeing posts attempting to shame/mock or otherwise influence people not to vote. While this is a meme community, the idea that people shouldn’t vote goes against the fundamentals of a democracy by the people and for the people. To that end, we are adding a new rule that disallows posts that discourage or shame people from voting. This doesn’t mean that you can’t address how people vote, but even those who don’t agree with you and your political views should still vote. We all should. Everyone. Part of the reason we are in the mess we are in now is because participation in democracy is abysmal. Posts discouraging people from voting are essentially propaganda and will be removed.
PoliticalMemes is a community for having fun at the expense of our political hellscape we find ourselves in. People not voting is a big part of why.
We are taking feedback on this change, please let us know if you agree or disagree in the comments and why.
Super in favor of this one! Barely just got on lemmy and all ive done is engage the bad faith actors in hopes of leaving some trace of sanity for the more impressionable to find.
This very thread is full of, “but cant you see how this rule change could turn authoritarian,” and “what u claim to have witnessed isnt real, its all just butthurt democrats and no one is actually actively trying to suppress voting.” To the lurkers, take note of the accounts that seem to do nothing but post about why voting is useless, why any complaints about biden are as relevant as complaints about dorito mussolini, or why russian imperial interests arent actually imeperial bc the west only ever lies, a fact unique to the west exclusively.
voting is not the only way for a democracy to keep its legs. very very far from it, actually. voting barely works and someone organizing on an union is doing far more for democracy than a lifetime blue voter ever will.
getting your opinions challenged is very healthy for public discourse, and this rule is just gonna turn this comm into a US democrat echo chamber.
also there are valid reasons you are even allowed not to vote. theres no reason to vote if you perceive candidates to be all bad (which they usually are), or if you are uninformed/disinformed. it goes on.
just because some people here disagree, doesnt mean that everyone who says this is a paid shill or something.
someone organizing on an union is doing far more.
Because a union - and I’m in one - helps organize … you can get there. vvvvvvoooooo… you’re almost there.
Worker unions serve the purpose of pressuring employers and/or governments directly for action on issues. Like salaries, leisure time, climate policy, etc. We do it mainly by the implied threat of a strike, mutual aid, and other ways.
Specifically as something beyond just indirectly voting for, say, a presidential candidate expecting him to do everything on our behalf.
Thats because its not meant to just leverage electoral power, but mainly the worker’s bargaining power directly: This way our often crappy elected officials on an often rigged system matter way less.
I fundamentally disagree with the underlying assumptions of this change, but understand its rationale, especially during an election year.
I fundamentally disagree with the underlying assumptions of the “Patriot Act,” but understand its rationale, especially during a War on Terror.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to prove here. Take any statement, put it in an absurd context, you get an absurd statement. Sure. But why?
“I disagree with capitalism and the elite hoarding all the wealth but I’m not sure I can do much about it alone”
“I disagree with Pineapple pizza and the cooks hoarding all the dough but I’m not sure I can do much about it alone”
Ok.
The difference is that I can share the underlying goal of what the mods are trying to achieve, while I wouldn’t share the underlying goal of the war on terror.
But you already guessed that I’m sure. A few edgelord points cheaply scored. That’s nice.
This isn’t about me or you. It’s about an unnecessary rule that forbids “thought crimes.”
” Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. ”
Benjamin Franklin
Informed voting is what’s important. Voting in-and-of-itself doesn’t contribute to a healthy democracy. To the contrary, mindless voting almost killed democracy multiple times recently.
To that end, I disagree with the notion that everyone should vote: filling your ballot on name recognition or in accordance with some preacher’s orders or some shit is dangerous, and if that’s you, then you absolutely should not vote!
Dig. Get at least some basic info on the people on your ballot. Consider the secondary and tertiary effects of any proposed policy; consider how it could back fire, etc. Once you actually understand what you’re voting on, THEN vote. But if you won’t take the time to do that, just showing up isn’t doing any kind of civic duty.
Your right maybe we should have a test that you have to take before you can vote. But that might accidentally disinfancise people who are competent to vote, so to be safe if your family has a tradition of voting you probably learned about it at home, so if your grandfather could vote you don’t have to take the test. This is a good and original system you have created.
To vote answer this question.
Snow is the same color as:
- -flower
- -grass
- -skin
- -roses
Aight I thought the other guy was just trolling, so I didn’t bother with a reply, but it looks like you reached the same conclusion, so maybe I didn’t make myself clear.
No where in my post did I say uninformed voters shouldn’t be allowed to vote; I said they shouldn’t vote. That might sound pedantic, but it’s an important distinction.
My issue is with the cultural notion that “It’s your civic duty to vote!” cuz no, it isn’t. Voting is a tool, and like any other tool it can be used in a dangerous way if you don’t take the time to understand how it works.
If you’re not sure how to operate pneumatic hammer, you shouldn’t do that either; but I’m not saying you should be disallowed from handling one or face legal consequences for trying; I’m saying YOU should have the sense to recognize the potential for harm from misuse of the tool in question, and YOU should choose to abstain from trying until you’ve done some homework.
If you are asking people to self select not to vote, only informed voters will self select out. The vast majority of poorly informed or misinformed voters don’t know enough to identify their knowledge gaps. Like a voting Dunning-Kruger asking people to abstain from voting if they are uninformed will actually result in an overall less informed voting population. If you want informed voters then get everyone to vote and increase voter education.
It’s not misinformed voting that caused Trump’s ascension to power. Participation was abysmally low (55% of the adult population). I don’t think Trump, or any other far-right lunatic, can win an election without voter apathy.
Do not reinforce stereotypes that some people should not be allowed to vote because they’re too stupid. It is sterile and dangerous.
True, but the undemocratic idea that voting should be left to “informed” people (who decides who’s informed, or how do you make sure people are impartially informed, anyway?), is still dangerous. The idea that a part of the population is too dumb to take part in democracy is a core motivation of eugenism.
Don’t discourage people voting against their interest from voting. You need their vote to dislodge autocrats. You need to convince them instead. If you believe in democracy, that is.
