I just turned eighteen (adult suffrage in India) 7 months back and already I have had an opportunity to vote. I had thought it out well. I had taken time understanding how the whole system works. I had realised what weight one single vote carries. I'm glad I had done so. I feel proud that I was a part of the largest elections ever held in human history until now.
How was it like to vote for the first time?
I turned 18 right before the 2000 US presidential election. I stood in line to cast my vote against George W. Bush. My vote was negated by a corrupt court. It hurt. I've never given a shit about voting since, although I've always participated in the dreadful act, as I can't seem to break the habit. Or, I feel indifference toward voting, but I'd feel worse not voting. That said, I think democracy has its upside, and I'm glad that you are able to participate in yours. It still beats the hell out of the alternative.
The US isn't a democracy. It's a republic. EDIT: The "it's a republic" comment was meant to point out my superior intellect and immense knowledge of all political issues. If any of you ever need any advice on who to elect as the next PotUS, just message me. Spoiler: You need to vote for Ron Paul. Damn those who think the government should have control over healthcare, we're not Canada. We need to keep our ideals separate. This is all just some master plan to merge the US and Canada into a super-country that will rule North America. People will then rebel in retaliation to the merger, and a violent war will be waged from either side of the border. Hockey pucks will be found lodged into Americans' skulls; there will be a note left in the victims' breast pocket reading "I'm sorry." Canadians will be found lying on the side of the road, dying. Cholesterol overdose from the invasion of American fast food. No apology. This is war.
If you're talking about that study, there are some serious methodological problems with it. First an foremost, it simply assumes that because government actions are more likely to align with the interests of the wealthy than those of the larger population, the wealthy must wield the power, while, as they say in the study, it is largely accounted for by the massive status quo bias of a bicameral legislature and the other checks and balances of the federal government.
I turned 18 right before the 1992 US presidential election, so I stood in line to cast my vote against George H. Bush. My vote helped keep that shitheel to one term. It was glorious. I've given too much of a shit about voting since, although deep down in my heart I know that I'm definitely not the "swing" that actually decides elections. That said, I've voted absentee for pushing twenty years now which means the wife and I sit down with our ballots and a bottle of wine and go through the literature several weeks before we need to. If I still lived up by my uncle's I'd go over to his "election parties" where the entire clan assembles to hash shit out drunk. It's pretty awesome as my cousin is a radical left-wing prepper and my pseudo-aunt worked for the US Chamber for 30 years. My kinda blood sport.
I recently watched a documentary on George H Bush and first of all, skip it, but there was one interesting part..When he was asked to comment on Ross Perot and what he did for that election, Bush refused and said the only thing I can say is that "I don't like him, I don't like him one bit." -The entire documentary he's affable and grandfatherly, with a pleasant enough demeanor then Perot is mentioned and his whole face changes. -hatred.
Every generation needs a Strom Thurmond, I guess. I just wish mine hadn't been goddamn Ralph Nader.
Never heard of a court nullifying someone's vote here in India before, or anywhere for that matter. It is good to vote and keep oneself engaged in the socio-political structure. I somehow gives a -gasm to debate on something very much physical and current. Agreed! Democracy beats the hell out the alternative most of the time, if not all.
Ah, let me clarify. It wasn't my vote specifically. In 2000, the people of the US elected Al Gore as president. I voted for him. The Supreme Court then decided that a subset of ballots in Florida didn't count (because of some tortured legal logic), thus allowing George W. Bush to have a majority of votes in Florida. Because of our crazy electoral system, this allowed Bush to win on a technicality, even though Gore had many more total votes (and more in Florida, although some were disallowed, as I stated). It was the kind of thing that the US would have condemned outright had it happened in your country or anywhere else. Here, it was business as usual.
I suppose part of why I'm so gung-ho about voting may be that the very first election I participated in was one in which a few votes DID make a difference - the Webb vs. Allen race in 2006.
For me it was in 96 Clinton v Dole. I was really excited about it. I recall going to the polls with my parents as a kid and I was always entranced by the passion people had for the event. I grew up in a small town and I knew the man that looked up my name on the registry when signing in. It felt very Rockwell-esque. Congratulations to you. How did the election go? Did the people you voted for gain office? Were there any amendments or specific propositions on the ballot?
Talking about the amount of passion people have while voting... I found youngsters, around my age, and first time voters thrilled. There had been a turn out of 65%, average of all the districts taken part only in this phase of the central (senate) parliamentary elections, which is really good for such a country like India. Though it ain't a fierce battle between the parties as the expected winner to form the government is Bharathiya Janta Party and their prime ministerial candidate Narandra Modi, which is the ongoing hype and the expected outcome. The counting is started only after all the phases of the elections are over. The ninth and the last phase to be held on May 12. Counting is to be held on 16 May and results to be declared on the same day. The person I voted to represent my districts to the House of the People is V Balakrishanan from Aam Admi Party (we were discussing about them few weeks ago), former CFO of Infosys, an Indian software giant. I expect him to take the position for his experience. I don't expect AAP to form the national government but giving him a chance than his corrupt and communal rivals seemed to be a better option. Thank you for your wishes. And oh! I didn't understand the last question.
Sometimes in the US, when it is election time you can vote for certain policy initiatives, for example there can be a proposal for a state ban on gay marriage. I was asking if there were any policy proposals on the ballot that you were passionate about.
There hasn't any official proposal to vote on here. Though, the Aam Admi Party has been promising a clean and s corrupt free government if it comes to power, after which every other party has been following with announcements including the exact same statements. I would rather vote for a proposal for faster development of the country. There have been statements by parties on withdrawing the allowance of foreign direct investments in retail industry, which was set in by the incumbent government and widely criticised for doing so. As India is a diverse country there have been controversial and unconstitutional communal statements which are shameful to be talked about as we boast of being a secular socialist democratic republic. There has not been a party with a perfectly general secular socialist ideology, like always in any election. I have been wondering why, even when the mass would like such a national party.
Exactly how were they going to do this?the Aam Admi Party has been promising a clean and s corrupt free government if it comes to power
The leader of Aam Admi Party, Arvind Kejriwal, nearly 3 years back, had drafted a bill along with a few other people from the civil society. It received a lot of media attention and was taken up widely by the public. This bill was rejected in parliament, after an extended session of parliament, which is said to be one of the main reasons to drop himself in mainstream politics. Look out for Jan Lokpal Bill (literally meaning People Governance Bill): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Lokpal_Bill He was also one of the leading persons in the civil society to draft the Right to Information Act, 2005. His alma-mater being one the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology. But he has lost credibility after resigning from the seat of governance moments after he couldn't pass the Jan Lokpal Bill in the state of Delhi, where his party formed the government recently, with himself being the Chief Minister.
Congratulations. What a cool thing to be a part of regardless of the outcome. My first vote was at a local election, I think for city council. I became worried when I realized I didn't know anything about anyone on the ballot. Luckily, thanks to my hours spent umpiring little league baseball games and staring out at the outfield fence advertisements, after heavy thought I was able to successfully vote for people I vaguely recalled had funded the kids' ballpark.
Well for me it was heartbreaking. It was 2008. I was full of Hope and praying for Change. I voted for Obama. I figured he was probably lying about most of what he said but, hey, if he even went in that direction it'd be terrific. In the preceeding years he violated every singular solitary compaign promise he made, legally sanctioned the indefinite detention of American citizens, started killing with drones on foreign soil, and surveilling with them domestically and in a fascist flourish began signing into law bills quite literally written by corporate lawyers. He makes Bush look like a Weather Underground operative. The police state, in the time since, has become completely out of control. I see another news story about police brutality or straight homicide with a badge every day. They're passing out 13,000 Mine Resistant Armored Personell vehicles domestically this year. Our post office is putting in orders for machine guns. While marijuana is slowly approaching legalization, fascist authoritarian market restrictions in Canada have already handed their entire medical market over to a small handful of supercorporations and legislation to do the same is already in the works here in California, where I cultivate medical marijuana as a livlihood. So my American Dream of 40 acres and a bong is on shakey ground, too. But then again, I'm American, and America isn't a Democracy, it's an Oligarchy. Your nation is also most likely an Oligarchy, though I can't say as I know.
True. My nation is also another Oligarchy. Especially under the current family rule of the so-called 'Gandhi'-Nehru family in the name of the Indian National Congress Party. It is shameful in many ways to talk about my own country in this sense after the post title calling it the largest democracy. But now there seems to be good news. We got a not so anarchic ruler coming. But he is expected to rise communal tensions.But then again, I'm American, and America isn't a Democracy, it's an Oligarchy. Your nation is also most likely an Oligarchy, though I can't say as I know.
Good job! My very first election was Jim Webb (the senator) vs. George Allen in the state of Virginia, USA. I voted Webb. Not that Webb wasn't a shithead (he made some very sexist comments about women at the Naval Academy), but George Allen was by far the bigger shithead. One part of being an American is that you often vote defensively. I also voted for Obama in his election against McCain. And no, I don't regret it; McCain would have been worse. Same thing with respect to Obama vs. Romney. Romney added a thin layer of awkward to your standard Republican ick. EDIT: I have but one badge to give, and I'm going to badge this thread.
A disappointment, both at the time and in hind-sight. Any centralized form of government, no matter how well intended, cannot work properly on the local, decentralized level due to the massive amounts of exceptions-to-the-rule which need to be recognized. Making a law, or a rule, cannot work properly if this law is decided upon far away from the local situation. I voted a couple of times when I still thought letting someone else decide for me was a good idea. Can't say I felt nice and fuzzy inside afterwards. But congratulations to you my friend, I hope your system works for you and your fellow Indians.
Direct democracy is nice in theory, but outside the United States seems to act effectively only at small-scale levels. Two cantons in Switzerland do it, and that's all. My objections to it are largely these. The first, explained by James Madison, in the Federalist number 10: The others are summed up by democratic theorists as participation, deliberation, and equality, which can be explained mostly as 'y'all aren't going to participate, act like nice rational folks, and let everyone be heard'. EDIT: And I guess with regard to voting or not voting, I see the dilemma (which I don't have, I vote as often as I can) as this: do you care more about a goal that you don't even do anything for by not voting and staying put and which would probably be more effectively realized by actively mobilizing, speaking up, and calling for a change in the nature of representation (and which is, according to said democratic theorists, probably pretty infeasible in practice for both human behavioral and bureaucratic reasons if you want to accomplish anything within a reasonable amount of time), or do you care more about using this clearly very imperfect system to accomplish other goals you may have for society, which are far more likely to be accomplished if people do in fact vote for them instead of sitting home and doing nothing?(A) pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority, and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.
First of all, I'm vehemently opposed to all forms of government which force rules upon me or anyone else without my or their say in it. That being said, direct democracy can work, even with the political infrastructure as we have today: there will be a need for administrators, secretaries, mailmen, etc etc
Just a matter of reversing the flow of political power. Watch or listen/read some of Etienne Chouard's work (a french philosopher, his movies and talks can be found on youtube).
The idea is so simple and elegant it could work within a day:
the secret is, you begin from the base up. It's too late to continue today; will do so tomorrow.