4 ms·

>> The illegality of their vote is supported by the judicial system, not political. However it came about, that's a really political situation to be in. It sou

>> The illegality of their vote is supported by the judicial system, not political. However it came about, that's a really political situation to be in. It sounds to me like Spain has set up a legal framework in which war is the only way to leave a democracy. I'm not familiar enough with Catalonia's motive's here to judge their decision, but that's a shitty situation in which to make that decision. And to be clear, I think that's a problem with a lot democracies. You end up with tyranny of the majority, and you either "pay the price for living in a civilized society" or you end up in an armed battle. There's no, "oh okay - I'll stop using nationally-funded roads and you can stop taking my money to start wars elsewhere." I think this is subconsciously part of why the 2 parties in the US seem so irrational to each other - there's only a need to get 51% (or in very few cases 67%) and then protect your existing supporters - there's no need to make a system that works for almost everyone. So people feel alienated and defensive, but basically do the same thing that was done to them the second they get their foot in the door. >> the votes were not supported by any international body and were not conducted in a public or transparent manner >> Only 38% of Cataluá citizens voted, the remaining 62% did not participate in this vote. Huh - sounds like elections in the US too. #twins

flamedoge 9y ago
How to solve voter turnout? free donuts?
- crooked-v 9y ago
  Mandatory voting, with real but minor punishments for not filing a ballot (but no requirement to actually vote for a candidate, to allow for cases where none of the above appeal). Of course, this will never happen with the current political structure of the US, as the Republican Party works to aggressively reduce total voter turnout everywhere it can.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    How would you implement mandatory voting without doing what Republicans want to do to verify right-to-vote in the first place? Requirements to vote have been associated with racism in the past, sure, and the ideas are often stupid and pointless, but talking to foreigners, myself included, the opposition to having to show ID to vote seems stupid too.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      Voter ID, but getting a Voter ID is free, and every district has to have the same opening hours and the same number of voter ID registration places per 1000 citizen. The issue is that certain actors in the US want to make voter ID mandatory, only registration places in the rich districts, and ensure the poor can never get one via cost/availability, etc. In other countries, where this disenfranchisement never happened, say, Germany, mandatory ID for every human are laws few object to.
    - erikpukinskis 9y ago
      If the law also made IDs free then I’d be ok with it. Pay to vote seems like a horrible system. And “free if you spend hours on the phone and mailing forms back and forth to prove you’re poor” doesn’t count. I would also need funding for sending out educational advertising in areas where there are high numbers of eligible voters without valid ID. I don’t see Republicans making a good faith effort here though.
    - crooked-v 9y ago
      Use existing voter registrations.
  - ryanlol 9y ago
    >Mandatory voting, with real but minor punishments for not filing a ballot Exactly what they did in Catalonia. If you don't vote then your voice will not be heard.
  - ericd 9y ago
    If they make voting day a national holiday, and they make the ID free and easy to get, then maybe. I believe it's mandatory in Australia, would be interesting to learn how they've felt about it.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  Haven't looked at the problem much, but I suspect it's a feeling of futility. If the problem in Spain is half the possible votes are illegal, I'd probably feel like whatever's going to happen through diplomatic channels is going to happen because that doesn't feel like a real election. In the US, most people live in either a red state or blue state and it'd take a heck of an upset to change that - and no one feels like a heck of an upset is coming. There are swing states where a tiny difference makes a huge difference nationally - and I suspect turnout is better in those states. But I haven't looked at it much - I could be wrong, and that would blow my theories to hell.
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  I think your idea is much better than everything else's, sadly. Yes, some form of tax return bonus would probably be the most effective mechanism.
- HelloNurse 9y ago
  Rajoy solved the problem of high voter turnout by having the federal police assault voters. Not exactly democratic.
- Godel_unicode 9y ago
  Make individuals feel their votes matter. Tricky, because obvious math says they don't.
- taejo 9y ago
  Make elections legitimate and meaningful. Turnout is low in Catalan independence referenda and US elections for different reasons. The former are viewed by opponents of independence as illegitimate: they are not approved by the central government and voting in them gives them the appearance of legitimacy. They're political tactic by the independence movement, and its opponents won't participate. The Spanish government could solve this by allowing an election, pledging to take the result seriously, and thereby answer the question for at least a generation. A significant factor in low turnout in US elections can be explained by the non-competitiveness of elections (correlation coefficient between turnout and margin by state was -0.4 in the last presidential election). If more states were competitive or the president were elected by popular vote (or Congress by proportional representation), turnout might be very different.
morsch 9y ago
The Catalan election was declared illegal before it started, with fairly heavy handed measures taken by the central government. Whether you think that's reasonable or not, it's not really comparable to low turnouts in general elections.
lacion 9y ago
this is true for many countries. as an example, the US constitution does not allow secession either. many countries had civil wars for unification long time ago, hence why secession is not allowed constitutionally in a bunch of them.
- slaymaker1907 9y ago
  You have to keep in mind that the civil war was over 150 years ago and the mood is quite different now. As a US citizen, I couldn't really tell you whether a state seceding would be met with war as in the past or if they would be allowed to quietly leave the union. There is always one state or another where some people think about it, and it seems like these discussions are never met with the hostility that Spain has shown to Catalonia.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    I've wondered about this a lot lately. I had family in northern Colorado when this was going on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado#Potential_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado#Potential_st.... It's relatively common there for people to identify more with the state than the nation, and for people to support the idea of state sovereignty (which is uncomfortable, since the Civil War was catalyzed by slavery, an instance in which every reasonable person would agree that individual sovereignty was already being grossly violated in a way that would justify war if that's what it took). But despite that feeling, many supported a motion to secede from the state and form a new one. It was quite popular within some of my social circles, but then it just fizzled out. Most of the anecdotal accounts of it I've heard indicate it fizzled out just because the governor planned to reject the idea and everyone saw that as a dead-end, so that was that. Very fascinating, I think.
bad_user 9y ago
You mention democracy and the "tyranny of the majority", but that's exactly what a democracy is, a doubly edged sword. At this point Spain's citizens have the right to determine Catalonia's fate, just as the people living there. Not saying that democracy is an end goal and should be protected against all odds, but if you don't like how democracy works, you're free to propose an alternative. > "pay the price for living in a civilized society" or you end up in an armed battle But that's how it has always been. In general the state has sovereignty over its territory, which is in general considered to be indivisible. And this is a civilized society, because in such a case people would hang for treason only a couple of hundred years ago. If I can proclaim my own bedroom to be independent, making up my own flag, then what's the point of having countries with borders and a Constitution? > "oh okay - I'll stop using nationally-funded roads and you can stop taking my money to start wars elsewhere." Well, that would be nice, except that you're also occupying a land that belongs to all citizens of that country, being your "property" only because the country's constitution allows it. If you're no longer willing to uphold that constitution, if you want to be free from the state's rule and laws, then it's no longer your land, unless you're able to defend it. So unless you have an army at your disposal, your only choice is either to bend over, or to move to another country, as people are in general free to seek their happiness elsewhere — unless you live in an isolated country that has closed its borders completely, like what happened in the Soviet block, in which case you're fucked, so I'm personally happy with the status quo.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  > If I can proclaim my own bedroom to be independent, making up my own flag, then what's the point of having countries with borders and a Constitution? That's actually a very good question. If Catalonia can claim itself to be independent and make up it's own flag, then what's the point of having Spain include it within its borders and govern it with it's Constitution? I think there are some very obvious answers to "why we need government", and "why Spain should exist". But if the costs start outweighing the benefits of those answers, and the people stop being able to answer that question to themselves, the government either needs to check itself, or the people should be free to leave. >> if you want to be free from the state's rule and laws, then it's no longer your land, unless you're able to defend it. And that's why we have civil wars, and they're horrible and should be avoided at all costs. If Spain chooses civil war over finding a peaceful way to satisfy Catalonian separatists (if that's what they're being called? Not sure), I call that a failure. > if you don't like how democracy works, you're free to propose an alternative On HN, yes, and I've been a part of good conversations along those lines. If Catalonia doesn't like how democracy works, are they free propose an alternative? Their vote's not perfect either, but they're not seeing many good, peaceful alternatives.

flamedoge 9y ago

How to solve voter turnout? free donuts?

crooked-v 9y ago
Mandatory voting, with real but minor punishments for not filing a ballot (but no requirement to actually vote for a candidate, to allow for cases where none of the above appeal). Of course, this will never happen with the current political structure of the US, as the Republican Party works to aggressively reduce total voter turnout everywhere it can.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  How would you implement mandatory voting without doing what Republicans want to do to verify right-to-vote in the first place? Requirements to vote have been associated with racism in the past, sure, and the ideas are often stupid and pointless, but talking to foreigners, myself included, the opposition to having to show ID to vote seems stupid too.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    Voter ID, but getting a Voter ID is free, and every district has to have the same opening hours and the same number of voter ID registration places per 1000 citizen. The issue is that certain actors in the US want to make voter ID mandatory, only registration places in the rich districts, and ensure the poor can never get one via cost/availability, etc. In other countries, where this disenfranchisement never happened, say, Germany, mandatory ID for every human are laws few object to.
  - erikpukinskis 9y ago
    If the law also made IDs free then I’d be ok with it. Pay to vote seems like a horrible system. And “free if you spend hours on the phone and mailing forms back and forth to prove you’re poor” doesn’t count. I would also need funding for sending out educational advertising in areas where there are high numbers of eligible voters without valid ID. I don’t see Republicans making a good faith effort here though.
  - crooked-v 9y ago
    Use existing voter registrations.
- ryanlol 9y ago
  >Mandatory voting, with real but minor punishments for not filing a ballot Exactly what they did in Catalonia. If you don't vote then your voice will not be heard.
- ericd 9y ago
  If they make voting day a national holiday, and they make the ID free and easy to get, then maybe. I believe it's mandatory in Australia, would be interesting to learn how they've felt about it.
TallGuyShort 9y ago
Haven't looked at the problem much, but I suspect it's a feeling of futility. If the problem in Spain is half the possible votes are illegal, I'd probably feel like whatever's going to happen through diplomatic channels is going to happen because that doesn't feel like a real election. In the US, most people live in either a red state or blue state and it'd take a heck of an upset to change that - and no one feels like a heck of an upset is coming. There are swing states where a tiny difference makes a huge difference nationally - and I suspect turnout is better in those states. But I haven't looked at it much - I could be wrong, and that would blow my theories to hell.
throwawayjava 9y ago
I think your idea is much better than everything else's, sadly. Yes, some form of tax return bonus would probably be the most effective mechanism.
HelloNurse 9y ago
Rajoy solved the problem of high voter turnout by having the federal police assault voters. Not exactly democratic.
Godel_unicode 9y ago
Make individuals feel their votes matter. Tricky, because obvious math says they don't.
taejo 9y ago
Make elections legitimate and meaningful. Turnout is low in Catalan independence referenda and US elections for different reasons. The former are viewed by opponents of independence as illegitimate: they are not approved by the central government and voting in them gives them the appearance of legitimacy. They're political tactic by the independence movement, and its opponents won't participate. The Spanish government could solve this by allowing an election, pledging to take the result seriously, and thereby answer the question for at least a generation. A significant factor in low turnout in US elections can be explained by the non-competitiveness of elections (correlation coefficient between turnout and margin by state was -0.4 in the last presidential election). If more states were competitive or the president were elected by popular vote (or Congress by proportional representation), turnout might be very different.

morsch 9y ago

The Catalan election was declared illegal before it started, with fairly heavy handed measures taken by the central government. Whether you think that's reasonable or not, it's not really comparable to low turnouts in general elections.

lacion 9y ago

this is true for many countries. as an example, the US constitution does not allow secession either. many countries had civil wars for unification long time ago, hence why secession is not allowed constitutionally in a bunch of them.

slaymaker1907 9y ago
You have to keep in mind that the civil war was over 150 years ago and the mood is quite different now. As a US citizen, I couldn't really tell you whether a state seceding would be met with war as in the past or if they would be allowed to quietly leave the union. There is always one state or another where some people think about it, and it seems like these discussions are never met with the hostility that Spain has shown to Catalonia.
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  I've wondered about this a lot lately. I had family in northern Colorado when this was going on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado#Potential_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Colorado#Potential_st.... It's relatively common there for people to identify more with the state than the nation, and for people to support the idea of state sovereignty (which is uncomfortable, since the Civil War was catalyzed by slavery, an instance in which every reasonable person would agree that individual sovereignty was already being grossly violated in a way that would justify war if that's what it took). But despite that feeling, many supported a motion to secede from the state and form a new one. It was quite popular within some of my social circles, but then it just fizzled out. Most of the anecdotal accounts of it I've heard indicate it fizzled out just because the governor planned to reject the idea and everyone saw that as a dead-end, so that was that. Very fascinating, I think.

bad_user 9y ago

You mention democracy and the "tyranny of the majority", but that's exactly what a democracy is, a doubly edged sword. At this point Spain's citizens have the right to determine Catalonia's fate, just as the people living there. Not saying that democracy is an end goal and should be protected against all odds, but if you don't like how democracy works, you're free to propose an alternative. > "pay the price for living in a civilized society" or you end up in an armed battle But that's how it has always been. In general the state has sovereignty over its territory, which is in general considered to be indivisible. And this is a civilized society, because in such a case people would hang for treason only a couple of hundred years ago. If I can proclaim my own bedroom to be independent, making up my own flag, then what's the point of having countries with borders and a Constitution? > "oh okay - I'll stop using nationally-funded roads and you can stop taking my money to start wars elsewhere." Well, that would be nice, except that you're also occupying a land that belongs to all citizens of that country, being your "property" only because the country's constitution allows it. If you're no longer willing to uphold that constitution, if you want to be free from the state's rule and laws, then it's no longer your land, unless you're able to defend it. So unless you have an army at your disposal, your only choice is either to bend over, or to move to another country, as people are in general free to seek their happiness elsewhere — unless you live in an isolated country that has closed its borders completely, like what happened in the Soviet block, in which case you're fucked, so I'm personally happy with the status quo.

TallGuyShort 9y ago
> If I can proclaim my own bedroom to be independent, making up my own flag, then what's the point of having countries with borders and a Constitution? That's actually a very good question. If Catalonia can claim itself to be independent and make up it's own flag, then what's the point of having Spain include it within its borders and govern it with it's Constitution? I think there are some very obvious answers to "why we need government", and "why Spain should exist". But if the costs start outweighing the benefits of those answers, and the people stop being able to answer that question to themselves, the government either needs to check itself, or the people should be free to leave. >> if you want to be free from the state's rule and laws, then it's no longer your land, unless you're able to defend it. And that's why we have civil wars, and they're horrible and should be avoided at all costs. If Spain chooses civil war over finding a peaceful way to satisfy Catalonian separatists (if that's what they're being called? Not sure), I call that a failure. > if you don't like how democracy works, you're free to propose an alternative On HN, yes, and I've been a part of good conversations along those lines. If Catalonia doesn't like how democracy works, are they free propose an alternative? Their vote's not perfect either, but they're not seeing many good, peaceful alternatives.