Quote:
Originally Posted by funchy  What about the people who abstain from voting for an office because they know nothing about the candidates? Isn't non-voting better than closing ones eyes and just randomly pressing a button? I try to stay informed, but sometimes I'll find names I don't know. |
Exactly, I think this is a good point. I would certainly sympathize with that. On the other hand, that means that you're leaving the voting to a lot of other people, who may not be any more well informed that you. I think many people, when they're not sure who to vote for, make their choices based on rather arbitrary criteria. Your guess may be as good as theirs, in other words (or slightly better, if you happen to have just a tiny bit of background information about the candidates).
As for the OP's question, yes, I think abstaining from voting should be allowed. If you force people to take political action, you may get better results in the short run (a higher turnout), but you'll probably get much worse results in the long run (by undermining the principles of freedom and democracy). There's much more to democracy than just voting.
For one thing, who'll decide what parties and people are available on the ballots? What if I want to create my own party, or be some sort of non-affiliated activist? Power needs to come directly from the people, not from the political establishment or the people who create the voting system.