5 ms·
But if you’re honest, what value does “strengthening the democratic process” have to you if you think the people in power or resulting policies are bad (unfair,
by baddox 8y ago
But if you’re honest, what value does “strengthening the democratic process” have to you if you think the people in power or resulting policies are bad (unfair, unjust, immoral, bad for the economy, etc.)? Democracy even in the most idealistic description isn’t some inherently good thing. It’s only good if the resulting policies and outcomes are good. Perhaps a staunch deontological ethicist will disagree with me here, and please do let me know.
If anything, a higher voter turnout may give a bad regime more confidence, or at least give them a nice talking point about their “mandate.”
Note that I absolutely do not intend to infer that any particular party or ideology or policy or even outcome is “the good” one. I mean that each person has their own views on what’s good and bad, and that high voter turnout in favor or opposing politicians or policies are absolutely not good for that person.
- jonathankoren 8y ago>If anything, a higher voter turnout may give a bad regime more confidence, or at least give them a nice talking point about their “mandate.” This is ahistorical. Bad regimes do not need an excuse to talk about how they are The One True Choice Of The People. In fact, bad an unpopular regimes have two very common modus operandis to maintain power, or at least the patina of democratic legitimacy. The first is simply fraudulent elections. We’re taking litteral ballot stuffing, and other unfair and unfree election tactics. The second, which has a long history in the United States, is voter suppression. This is where you make policies that ostensibly applies to everyone and makes elections “safer” or somehow better, but actually makes it harder on groups you think will oppose you from actually voting. Tactics include literacy tests, poll taxes, photographic ids, strict registration requirements that target students, selectively closing polling places early, or simply closing them in certain precincts, targetting strict handwriting or punctuation. Even gerrymandering could be considered election rigging. In all of these suppression cases, the commonality is that the politician is not being chosen by the voters, but rather the politician is choosing the voters.
- baddox 8y agoI completely agree. I don’t think the “mandate” stuff is a significant effect.
- guelo 8y agoBelief in the fairness of the system brings stability. Without it we start descending into political violence. We are already starting to see glimpses of it on both sides as people lose faith.