So, voting is a duty. What is voting? Isn't voting entering into a group contract where one opens oneself to the possibility of being forced to behave in a certain way combined with the hope of having ones desires enforced upon others? What grounds the justification of enforcing ones desires upon others? The opening of oneself to the possibility of having their desires enforced upon you? But this begs the question, as the opening of oneself to the possibility of having the desires enforced upon oneself is just one person enforcing her desires upon another.
So, that leaves open the question of what justifies one person enforcing his desires upon another.
Unless, of course, I'm construing the whole question too uncharitably, taking too harsh of a view on the whole concept of voting.
I think you're being too harsh, unless you're going to argue that the existence of laws and societal constraints against, say, killing and eating your neighbours are also "having the desires of another enforced on yourself".
Ultimately, I think there are natural ethical laws, like not murdering your neighbor, which, I think, are ultimately justified by something like an appeal to the categorical imperative; however, I don't think that every possible action is covered by the categorical imperative, as the categorical imperative (when supported by a standard logic) admits of antinomies, leaving some actions open to determination only by appealing to some type of consequentialist reasoning. However, I don't think that even both the categorical imperative and the consequentialism are enough to explain all types of actions; some actions are inherently morally neutral and whether or not you ought to do them is entirely up to your preferences. This last is the type of action, ones based solely on preference, which I don't think can be justly enforced or prohibited.
So, I don't disagree that some laws are just common sense and if somebody doesn't obey them they should be removed from society; however, I think this class of actions is rather small (assault, fraud, murder, rape, and robbery being the first five that come to mind). A lot of other laws are based on apparent increases of the chance of unintentional violation of basic laws, and these laws can be justified, I'd say, but some laws are unjust (prohibition being the one that first comes to mind). I don't think one actually has an obligation to follow unjust laws and, unfortunately, perhaps, one cannot go to the official communal consensus (determined via voting) to determine which laws are just and which are unjust.
The categorical failure is just as crap as the rest of Kant. Humans beings are not an undifferentiated mass and every situation does not admit of the same circumstances.
I say this as an anarchist: the enforcing of external will upon a person is not an intrinsically bad thing or even something to be avoided. The surrender of total autonomy is the foundation of civilization.
Sounds awesome, but you've got at about two more months before I'm crossing that border, and *at least* that long before I do it voluntarily and do anything other than leave right away again on the next flight.
In the space of fifteen and a half hours[1], the entire country will vote.
We will have complete, definitive, verifiable results in times for them to be printed in the morning editions of newspapers.
Why? Because we're not jackasses, and we know how to run elections like sane people do.
I really, really like being Canadian sometimes.
(PS: Before the claims that the US is different because it has more people show up, let me point out: India does the same thing, in the same timeframe, with the same results, using the same method. So there.)
[1]: Twelve hour voting blocks, spread across three and a half time zones
My new Newfie roommate isn't voting on the following premises:
a) "I'm not from here. My name wouldn't be on the riding, and I have no bills to show them with this address!" To this I explained that, as someone who's name IS on the list, I can swear an oath stating that he is part of our riding at the ballot station.
b) "I have to study!" Well, me too. We're in the same program. This is why I'm taking 5 minutes to vote at the ballot station that is a mere four minute walk away, and then going to school which is a mere 10 minute walk from there.
c) "One vote wouldn't make a difference anyways!" *headdesk*
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 01:55 pm (UTC)So, that leaves open the question of what justifies one person enforcing his desires upon another.
Unless, of course, I'm construing the whole question too uncharitably, taking too harsh of a view on the whole concept of voting.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 02:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 02:33 pm (UTC)So, I don't disagree that some laws are just common sense and if somebody doesn't obey them they should be removed from society; however, I think this class of actions is rather small (assault, fraud, murder, rape, and robbery being the first five that come to mind). A lot of other laws are based on apparent increases of the chance of unintentional violation of basic laws, and these laws can be justified, I'd say, but some laws are unjust (prohibition being the one that first comes to mind). I don't think one actually has an obligation to follow unjust laws and, unfortunately, perhaps, one cannot go to the official communal consensus (determined via voting) to determine which laws are just and which are unjust.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:43 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 11:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 11:25 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:39 pm (UTC)So, *I* have until 9:30 to vote, and then I can drive down and pummel Jamie.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 05:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 05:55 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:44 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:50 pm (UTC)In the space of fifteen and a half hours[1], the entire country will vote.
We will have complete, definitive, verifiable results in times for them to be printed in the morning editions of newspapers.
Why? Because we're not jackasses, and we know how to run elections like sane people do.
I really, really like being Canadian sometimes.
(PS: Before the claims that the US is different because it has more people show up, let me point out: India does the same thing, in the same timeframe, with the same results, using the same method. So there.)
[1]: Twelve hour voting blocks, spread across three and a half time zones
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 04:52 pm (UTC)Do you guys have a party that is dedicated to the stealing of elections in every city?
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 05:01 pm (UTC)Do you guys have a party that is dedicated to the stealing of elections in every city?
The wonder of the system is that *it doesn't matter*.
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 05:23 pm (UTC)a) "I'm not from here. My name wouldn't be on the riding, and I have no bills to show them with this address!" To this I explained that, as someone who's name IS on the list, I can swear an oath stating that he is part of our riding at the ballot station.
b) "I have to study!" Well, me too. We're in the same program. This is why I'm taking 5 minutes to vote at the ballot station that is a mere four minute walk away, and then going to school which is a mere 10 minute walk from there.
c) "One vote wouldn't make a difference anyways!" *headdesk*
(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 05:34 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 06:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 07:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-14 11:17 pm (UTC)But I voted, and now I have celebratory beer and pizza. I love voting.
Done
Date: 2008-10-15 01:21 am (UTC)Re: Done
Date: 2008-10-15 04:22 pm (UTC)Re: Done
Date: 2008-10-15 04:33 pm (UTC)How 'bout you?
Re: Done
Date: 2008-10-15 04:39 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-15 03:21 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2008-10-15 04:22 pm (UTC)