Citizens who do not vote: a problem or an ideal solution? What do you think!!?
The society we live in teaches us that voting is a fundamental right of citizens, which would allow them to exercise their authority over the government. Through voting, citizens can choose their representatives in government and influence political decisions.
However, let's suppose that through an absurdity the great majority of the people of a certain state would collectively decide not to exercise their own vote anymore!!! What do you think about the situation in which the citizens of a state would refuse to exercise their electoral vote?
It is well known that in a democracy, citizens have the right and obligation to vote. However, there are a variety of situations in which citizens may refuse to vote. What consequences does this have for democracy?
--- This question was created on [reverio.io](https://reverio.io), Reverio is a question and answer platform built exclusively for Hive. Answer this question on Reverio by clicking [here](https://Reverio.io/question/valentin86/citizens-who-do-not-vote--a-problem-or-an-ideal-solution--what-do-you-think---).
Just that the candidate would vote for himself, and would consequently be elected with 100% of the expressed vote. That's why in France, during elections, they don't count blank ballots, spoiled ballots, and voter abstention. As a result, the candidate still prevails even if no one wants him.
I suspect that this happens in each individual country ~ normally it would be absurd to elect someone as leader if the vast majority does not prefer him and yet there is a risk that he will win. In my country, the votes considered to be invalid will be counted, but the abstentions will be made public in the form of percentages. Curious what the pacifist method would be, by which the citizens would throw out all those who are in the parliament of a country!!! From my point of view it's a problem with the voting system (it's still primitive) ~ it should be expressed publicly without anonymity and those who left their own country, working in other types of countries and those who don't know how to read should not still have the right to vote. !PGM !LOOLZ !MEME
BUY AND STAKE THE PGM TO SEND A LOT OF TOKENS!
The tokens that the command sends are: 0.1 PGM-0.1 LVL-0.1 THGAMING-0.05 DEC-15 SBT-1 STARBITS-[0.00000001 BTC (SWAP.BTC) only if you have 2500 PGM in stake or more ]
5000 PGM IN STAKE = 2x rewards!
Discord
Support the curation account @ pgm-curator with a delegation 10 HP - 50 HP - 100 HP - 500 HP - 1000 HP
Get potential votes from @ pgm-curator by paying in PGM, here is a guide
I'm a bot, if you want a hand ask @ zottone444
lolztoken.com
Kommt wieder raus - Pony weg.
Credit: vasupi
@hive-103505, ich habe dir im Namen von @valentin86 einen $LOLZ Token gesendet
Verwende den Befehl !WITZ oder !LOOL, um einen Witz und ein $LOLZ zu teilen.
Delegate Hive Tokens to Farm $LOLZ and earn 110% Rewards. Learn more.
.(1/10)
Credit: jacobtothe
Earn Crypto for your Memes @ HiveMe.me!
Political apathy is really spreading massively and causing strange wave in our society as people are continuously losing interest to vote
Great question !
There are a few countries where voting is mandatory (Australia, most of South America, Egypt, Angola and a couple of others), although I don't know how thoroughly it is enforced. As a personal principle I think voting should be optional rather than required, but that's because I believe in individual freedom.
Where voting is optional, we often see opposition parties calling for their supporters to boycott an election. It usually seems to be where they have no chance of winning anyway, either because they have less support than they pretend to have, or because the system is rigged in some way. At that point, it should be questioned whether a country is still a democracy. A boycott guarantees the other side (usually the incumbent) will win, and is really just an excuse for the loser to claim the winner has no legitimacy, often as a precursor to an armed insurrection or mass demonstrations (with or without foreign support).
* Where there is low voter turnout but no actual boycott, the causes can be complex, and it's likely there's no single reason. But it all comes down to some combination of;
* Voters believing the result is a foregone conclusion
* Disillusionment with all the candidates presented to them
* Distrust in the honesty of the voting or counting process
* Fear of intimidation or violence at the polling station
* Fear of post-electoral repercussions if they vote the "wrong" way (a fatal flaw with electronic voting machines which record who voted for which candidate)
* Sometimes just a lack of education about what democracy is supposed to look like.
Democracy is being challenged worldwide at present, and I have to be honest and say that it appears that in it's current form it is fatally flawed and no longer the best form of government available. Falling turnout here in the UK (particularly in local elections) suggest that I'm not the only one who thinks this !
As for the solution; I think democracy can work on a local level, but would only work on a national level if the big business money and lobbyists were taken out of the equation, if secret ballots were restored, postal voting abolished (I've seen it abused far too effectively !), and the party system abolished so that elected representatives looked after the interests of their local electorate not that of a party which takes it's orders from supranational organisations.
Okay, I'll stop being controversial now.....