Moggy wrote:OrangeRakoon wrote:Imagine someone who has no knowledge of the various political parties or any of their policies or manifesto pledges. Would you still encourage that person to go out and vote?
I think everyone should make an informed vote - but given the choice between an uninformed vote or no vote at all, I'd prefer the latter. An uninformed vote only dilutes the effect of an informed one.
This hypothetical person doesn’t really exist though do they? Or are you saying that there are people out there with no knowledge of any of the parties that can be persuaded to go and vote, while still not bothering to look into the parties?
If anybody out there is so ignorant that they have no idea at all of the parties or policies, they are not going to go and vote based on a Facebook message of “Go and vote you lazy banana split or else I will bore you to death by explaining what Tu quoque means
”.
It's a hypothetical person and yes, it's doubtful that a real-life example of a completely uninformed person would ever be persuaded to go out and vote. I don't think it's a meaningless question to ask though, in the context of deciding whether increasing voter turnout is a good thing.
The base assumption is that higher voter turnout is good for a healthy democracy. The more people that vote, the more representative parliament is of the people. But to address the hypothetical I would say, and I think that many people would agree, that it is not a good idea for a completely uninformed person to vote. It doesn't improve the parliament's representation of the people because such a vote would be (as we've set up the scenario) arbitrary.
Logically this sets you up to then ask - what if the person now has incredibly little knowledge of the different parties and their policies, so little as to be the minimum possible without being /completely/ uninformed? Is any level of interest/knowledge/opinion enough to make encouraging that person to vote a good idea? Again I would say no.
What that establishes is that there is probably
some minimum level of being informed at which you'd want someone to be before they commit to voting - some point at which encouraging them to vote would in fact increase parliament's representation of the people.
Trying to strictly define that is going to be hard and open for much debate, but we don't need to for the original hypothetical question to have been of use to us. Following through the above logic we can conclude that it is not enough to just encourage more people to vote and to try to increase voter turnout, but it's also important to encourage more people to become better informed on politics and the policies of those they are voting for.
tl;dr, I'd change Karl's "Everyone should vote, it's really important." into "Everyone should find out about their candidates and the parties and vote, it's really important."