Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Those not enrolled to vote

razor066
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 6:49:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
If someone is not enrolled to vote in Australia and therefore does not vote, are they entitled to a political opinion? If yes, why? If no, why not?
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 8:52:07 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Voting is the worst thing you could do: remember, if you 'support' one prime minister because he is the 'lesser of two evils' you are SUPPORTING the evil aspects as well as the good. Every person who has ever supported evil has done so because they believed it was the lesser of two evils, or a necessary evil.. IMO you should reject all evil.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:36:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 8:52:07 AM, sdavio wrote:
Voting is the worst thing you could do: remember, if you 'support' one prime minister because he is the 'lesser of two evils' you are SUPPORTING the evil aspects as well as the good. Every person who has ever supported evil has done so because they believed it was the lesser of two evils, or a necessary evil.. IMO you should reject all evil.

So if one encounters a robber who says "your money or your life," he should condone neither and lose both?
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:40:32 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 9:36:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 8/31/2013 8:52:07 AM, sdavio wrote:
Voting is the worst thing you could do: remember, if you 'support' one prime minister because he is the 'lesser of two evils' you are SUPPORTING the evil aspects as well as the good. Every person who has ever supported evil has done so because they believed it was the lesser of two evils, or a necessary evil.. IMO you should reject all evil.

So if one encounters a robber who says "your money or your life," he should condone neither and lose both?

Life is more complicated than these double choice things - everyone supporting socialism always does it with these puzzles.. it's just not how morality / the world works. My point was not that we must always be perfect.. but that the choice should not be between one completely immoral leader and another 'almost completely' immoral leader.. that we should choose no leader.
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:46:59 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I normally spoil my ballot as a matter of principle, but to answer the question; of course. There are no good choices, that doesn't mean one should have to make a bad choice to have an opinion on those choices. Even if there were good choices, one could reason that their vote is so inconsequential (factual) that the probability of them making a difference is minute enough to not be worth their time voting.
To preempt any "what if everyone thought that way" arguments. I can predict with great certainty that this year not everyone will think that way, and sadly I cant control people so my actions aren't going to affect theirs.
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:52:17 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 9:40:32 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 8/31/2013 9:36:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 8/31/2013 8:52:07 AM, sdavio wrote:
Voting is the worst thing you could do: remember, if you 'support' one prime minister because he is the 'lesser of two evils' you are SUPPORTING the evil aspects as well as the good. Every person who has ever supported evil has done so because they believed it was the lesser of two evils, or a necessary evil.. IMO you should reject all evil.

So if one encounters a robber who says "your money or your life," he should condone neither and lose both?

Life is more complicated than these double choice things - everyone supporting socialism always does it with these puzzles.. it's just not how morality / the world works.

My point was not that we must always be perfect.. but that the choice should not be between one completely immoral leader and another 'almost completely' immoral leader.. that we should choose no leader.

But what if that is the choice? What if the choice is between losing $1,000 or $10,000? Losing an arm or losing both? In the case of electing a politician, if one of the two candidates will be in the position to affect your life (for better or worse), how are you unjustified in voting for the candidate who you feel would be less disastrous to your life?
sdavio
Posts: 1,798
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2013 9:55:09 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/31/2013 9:52:17 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 8/31/2013 9:40:32 AM, sdavio wrote:
At 8/31/2013 9:36:32 AM, dylancatlow wrote:
At 8/31/2013 8:52:07 AM, sdavio wrote:
Voting is the worst thing you could do: remember, if you 'support' one prime minister because he is the 'lesser of two evils' you are SUPPORTING the evil aspects as well as the good. Every person who has ever supported evil has done so because they believed it was the lesser of two evils, or a necessary evil.. IMO you should reject all evil.

So if one encounters a robber who says "your money or your life," he should condone neither and lose both?

Life is more complicated than these double choice things - everyone supporting socialism always does it with these puzzles.. it's just not how morality / the world works.

My point was not that we must always be perfect.. but that the choice should not be between one completely immoral leader and another 'almost completely' immoral leader.. that we should choose no leader.

But what if that is the choice? What if the choice is between losing $1,000 or $10,000? Losing an arm or losing both? In the case of electing a politician, if one of the two candidates will be in the position to affect your life (for better or worse), how are you unjustified in voting for the candidate who you feel would be less disastrous to your life?

Well your vote doesn't matter in that case anyway.. apart from the completely unlikely case that there's 1 vote difference which is a crazy thing to count on.. the vote that will make the most difference to people's minds is not voting IMO..
"Logic is the money of the mind." - Karl Marx