Comments on: To vote or not to vote? http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/ Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:18:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: MadMan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1029 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1029 In Australia, I was surprised to find that if you don't vote, you get hit with a $50 fine. There you go; democracy whether you want it or not. I remember the Election Commission in India planning to introduce a "none of the above" option on the ballot. I support such an option. It would give me the chance to make my view clear. And Yazad, on Channel V, you were asking people to start their own party if they were unhappy. Would you be interested in starting the Libertarian Party of India? We could start with the cartel as members, and build it from there. :) In Australia, I was surprised to find that if you don’t vote, you get hit with a $50 fine.

There you go; democracy whether you want it or not.

I remember the Election Commission in India planning to introduce a “none of the above” option on the ballot. I support such an option. It would give me the chance to make my view clear.

And Yazad, on Channel V, you were asking people to start their own party if they were unhappy. Would you be interested in starting the Libertarian Party of India? We could start with the cartel as members, and build it from there. :)

]]> by: MadMan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1030 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1030 More info <a href="http://www.australianpolitics.com/voting/systems/compulsory.shtml" rel="nofollow">here</a>. There's a list of other countries that have the same policy. Egypt is a strange inclusion. Hmmm... More info here.

There’s a list of other countries that have the same policy. Egypt is a strange inclusion. Hmmm…

]]> by: Anand http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1031 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1031 Political party?... hmmm.. not a bad idea... if you ever start one, count me in! Political party?… hmmm.. not a bad idea… if you ever start one, count me in!

]]> by: GK http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1032 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1032 In a 'libertarian' world, any citizen would have the right of speech. This is not to say that other systems do not allow freedom of speech, but i have seen libertarians immediately jump to the defense of someone who has been denied the right! what if he is a speaker who mouths obnoxious comments utterly defaming someone? In a ‘libertarian’ world, any citizen would have the right of speech. This is not to say that other systems do not allow freedom of speech, but i have seen libertarians immediately jump to the defense of someone who has been denied the right!

what if he is a speaker who mouths obnoxious comments utterly defaming someone?

]]> by: Ravikiran http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1033 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1033 Freedom of speech includes the right to be obnoxious. The only exceptions to this freedom are if you are conspiring to commit violence, inciting people to commit violence (this should be very very narrowly defined) or defaming someone (meaning that you are telling lies about someone, knowing that you are telling lies and you are doing so with the intention of hurting that person. The onus of proving every one of these points should be on the accuser) Freedom of speech includes the right to be obnoxious.
The only exceptions to this freedom are if you are conspiring to commit violence, inciting people to commit violence (this should be very very narrowly defined) or defaming someone (meaning that you are telling lies about someone, knowing that you are telling lies and you are doing so with the intention of hurting that person. The onus of proving every one of these points should be on the accuser)

]]> by: MadMan http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1034 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1034 One man's "obnoxious" is another man's "just tellin' the truth, man" :) (as in "you're one ugly muthaf***er" - Arnold in <i>Predator</i>) Ravi, I agree that the burden of proof for defamation should be on the accuser. So you'll probably find it interesting that under US law, the accuser has to prove it, while under UK law, the burden of defence is on the <i>accused</i>. GK, malicious intent is also an important component of defamation cases. One man’s “obnoxious” is another man’s “just tellin’ the truth, man” :)

(as in “you’re one ugly muthaf***er” - Arnold in Predator)

Ravi, I agree that the burden of proof for defamation should be on the accuser. So you’ll probably find it interesting that under US law, the accuser has to prove it, while under UK law, the burden of defence is on the accused.

GK, malicious intent is also an important component of defamation cases.

]]> by: GK http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1035 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1035 Exactly, now since the onus lies on the accuser, asuming he brings forth no proof but people[his supporters] take his words at face value, they propagate it, some proof is added along the way as the news goes from mouth to mouth. The accused by the time already feels the damage being done! Enough to scar his reputation. PEople are fickle, they like to malign a person of high moral or/and social standing. So the believe what they want to believe, a bit like belief in God. Nobody can prove he exists, atleast am yet to be convinced, but they still believe he exists. Point is, how can you claim freedom of speech guarantees you only sane, valid arguments against a good state? Anybody can spread false news, even though if he settles a million dollar case later, the damage has already been done!! How do the libertarians view this particular problem?? Exactly, now since the onus lies on the accuser, asuming he brings forth no proof but people[his supporters] take his words at face value, they propagate it, some proof is added along the way as the news goes from mouth to mouth.

The accused by the time already feels the damage being done! Enough to scar his reputation. PEople are fickle, they like to malign a person of high moral or/and social standing. So the believe what they want to believe, a bit like belief in God. Nobody can prove he exists, atleast am yet to be convinced, but they still believe he exists.

Point is, how can you claim freedom of speech guarantees you only sane, valid arguments against a good state? Anybody can spread false news, even though if he settles a million dollar case later, the damage has already been done!! How do the libertarians view this particular problem??

]]> by: Ck http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1036 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1036 Yazad is in Idiot He may find the term insulting but is it fact. The term idiot is derived from Greek word idiotes which is a person who does not cast his vote. Of course Yazad might have though that people are calling him an idiot in the modern context where it means: ass, blockhead, boob, booby, cretin, dimwit, donkey, dork, dumb ox, dumbbell, dunce, dunderhead, fool, halfwit, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, jerk, kook, meathead, mental defective, moron, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, pinhead, pointy head, simpleton, stupid, tomfool, twit, yo-yo I am sure, nay I know that Yazad is none of things but from the point of view of voting and elections he is an idiot. Of course Yazad might have a refreshing new point of view but I don't really see him competing philosophy-wise with the like of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates whose wisdom has been with us for millenia and who would also all have called Yazad an idiot I mean all they spoke was Greek right what else could they have claled up after reading his rant. Yazad is in Idiot
He may find the term insulting but is it fact. The term idiot is derived from Greek word idiotes which is a person who does not cast his vote. Of course Yazad might have though that people are calling him an idiot in the modern context where it means:

ass, blockhead, boob, booby, cretin, dimwit, donkey, dork, dumb ox, dumbbell, dunce, dunderhead, fool, halfwit, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, jerk, kook, meathead, mental defective, moron, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, pinhead, pointy head, simpleton, stupid, tomfool, twit, yo-yo

I am sure, nay I know that Yazad is none of things but from the point of view of voting and elections he is an idiot. Of course Yazad might have a refreshing new point of view but I don’t really see him competing philosophy-wise with the like of Plato, Aristotle and Socrates whose wisdom has been with us for millenia and who would also all have called Yazad an idiot I mean all they spoke was Greek right what else could they have claled up after reading his rant.

]]> by: Gaurav http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1037 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1037 Hey, been ages since I came across Ck's regurgitations. :) Hey, been ages since I came across Ck’s regurgitations. :)

]]> by: Gaurav http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1038 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/04/25/to-vote-or-not-to-vote/#comment-1038 Agree some, disagree a lot 1. Fear of misuse If your knife is your property, and you don't use it to kill someone, does it mean you will not mind the least bit if it is used by someone else to commit a murder? Like a knife, the misuse of a vote can be harmful. Another example is that of a car. If you have a rickety car and you dont give a damn if it is stolen. So you never lock it. A 12 year old goes joyriding in it and bangs into a pedestrian. Won't it bother you? 2. Don't expect any rights if you don't vote. Agree with what you say about this one. "Protest" and "It doesnt make a difference" can't go hand in hand. If a single vote doesnt make a difference, then a single protest won't make one either. "Don't see any candidate worthy of my support." again I agree with. Valid reason to not vote. Agree some, disagree a lot

1. Fear of misuse
If your knife is your property, and you don’t use it to kill someone, does it mean you will not mind the least bit if it is used by someone else to commit a murder? Like a knife, the misuse of a vote can be harmful. Another example is that of a car. If you have a rickety car and you dont give a damn if it is stolen. So you never lock it. A 12 year old goes joyriding in it and bangs into a pedestrian. Won’t it bother you?

2. Don’t expect any rights if you don’t vote.
Agree with what you say about this one.

“Protest” and “It doesnt make a difference” can’t go hand in hand. If a single vote doesnt make a difference, then a single protest won’t make one either.

“Don’t see any candidate worthy of my support.” again I agree with. Valid reason to not vote.

]]>