Who you vote for?

Lenin

Hey, I'm new. I'm a Marxist-Leninist and am not a fan of 'democracy' as we know it. I just want to know, if any of you vote, who do you vote for. What party here in Ireland? Any socialists here?

VI Lenin

bloggs

Originally posted by Lenin
Hey, I'm new. I'm a Marxist-Leninist and am not a fan of 'democracy' as we know it. I just want to know, if any of you vote, who do you vote for. What party here in Ireland? Any socialists here?

VI Lenin

This is a very strange question. You don't like democracy, but you want know who who we would vote for?

Democracy in my opinion is not perfect but it's certainly the best thing we have. If we lived under your Marxist-Leninist regime, surely we wouldn't have democracy, so if we didn't like marxism who the hell would we get rid of it (apart from forceably removing it)? That is why political movements like communism/marxism and facism will no longer work. People like to have a choice, and if they don't like the current regime they can vote them out. Not really much chance of that with someone like Stalin incharge

BTW, i would probably vote FG.

Éomer of Rohan

Quote from Lenin
Hey, I'm new. I'm a Marxist-Leninist and am not a fan of 'democracy' as we know it. I just want to know, if any of you vote, who do you vote for. What party here in Ireland? Any socialists here?

Greetings Lenin - I am a Marxist Leninist (Trotskyist) and I do not vote (at least until the next assembly election when the Socialist Party are running several single issue candidates and probably one outright socialist candidate.

If I voted, naturally I would vote Socialist Party.

The question now is, as per rules of posts, who do YOU vote for and why ask the question?

PS If you are Workers Party, Communist Party or SWP then we're going to have words

PH01

Originally posted by Lenin
Hey, I'm new. I'm a Marxist-Leninist and am not a fan of 'democracy' as we know it. I just want to know, if any of you vote, who do you vote for. What party here in Ireland? Any socialists here?

VI Lenin

Oh, please, please, please, lets not have a continuous ranting thread about how great Marxism/Leninism/Stalinism/Socialism/Greenism is and how capitalism is ruining the world.

bonkey

Given the topic, I somehow doubt that will be allowed to happen.

jc

bloggs

Originally posted by Lenin
Hey, I'm new. I'm a Marxist-Leninist and am not a fan of 'democracy' as we know it. I just want to know, if any of you vote, who do you vote for. What party here in Ireland? Any socialists here?

VI Lenin

Why are you not a fan of democracy? What should we replace it with? Please come back and answer my questions

bonkey

Originally posted by bloggs
Why are you not a fan of democracy? What should we replace it with? Please come back and answer my questions

Oh dear god....

is it that hard to stay on topic that you had to post this immediately following a post saying "lets not have this" and a reply from a moderator saying "we won't because its off topic"????

The Beer Baron

sorry Bonk, but I'm gonna digress further and say that our western democratic system if flawed based on the fact that most western countries tend to default to a 2-party system where the only difference between them is on paper only.

Fianna Fail, Fianna Gael? The difference please?
No more than Labour/Tories, Republicans/Democrats.
shall I go on?

I'll make this relevant again by alluding, once again, to the Simpsons to prove my point. (the ultimate source for political material)
When Bob Dole and Clinton were replaced by aliens- it makes no difference who you vote for- one's as bad as the other.

I mean at the moment there is no party or candidate that I could ever bring myself to activly support. And even if there was the chances of them getting into power is zero.

I last voted Fianna Gael simply because I didn't want Bertie in power again. Noonan- for all his faults, was at once both viceral in his condemnation of Bertie and, having met him once or twice in Limerick, found him to be an intelligent and articulate- therefore, less of an embarrasment to this country than our current shower of stuttering gob****es. And did I mention he also spat venom at Bertie?

Having said that I'd vote Sinn Fein if I thought they had a chance, I'd vote for anyone if I thought they had a chance. I'd vote for Nero, Calligula, Rasputin, Vlad the Impaler, bin Laden or the Boogeyman before I'd vote for Bertie.

Space replicons from beyond the moon?
Sure- they got my vote- just not Fianna Fail.

PH01

Jesus wept!

What's wrong with Fianna Fail? 38 out of a 100 cats say they prefer them

The Corinthian

I voted for Cicciolina once. I can't for the life of me remember which one of her policies won me over...

mr_angry

I don't see why anybody would vote for FG on policy issues. Fair enough, if you just don't like Bertie, then that's valid. But what was FG's major policy difference in the last general election - they wanted to refund Eircom shareholders money. Do they understand the mechanics of the stock market? I didn't know whether to laugh or cry at the time...

Lets face it though - the opposition in Ireland are pretty p*ss-poor, and the government aren't really that bad. If the worst you have to complain about is that Bertie is a bit of a fool, then the state of the nation can't be that bad.

Personally I'd vote Labour if they had a decent candidate in my area (Dundalk), but they don't, so I voted for Dermot Ahern, who's a pretty sound bloke, and has done a lot of good stuff for Dundalk. Labour are always good for public transport, and free education, etc. Suits my needs at the moment. The one party that I really hate is the PDs. How the hell did they get into office, with 3 TDs?

Anyway, you're perfectly entitled to your view on Marxism / Democracy, but we live in a democracy where people are fairly happy to vote to keep it that way, and you are in a very small minority.

star gazer

I would consider myself a very frustrated Fine Gael voter. I think at its core, Fine Gael really is about the long-term prosperity of Ireland and not just the quick buck, like some other parties i won't mention. However it is frustrating seeing Fine Gael move from one PR mess to another and rarely coming in with that cutting edge that all opposition parties need.
As for Communism, it looks good in theory but in practice, on this planet, it never seemed to improve the lot of the ordinary worker on the whole. One thing i'll give you is that at least the cubans have a half decent health service.

bloggs

Originally posted by star gazer
I would consider myself a very frustrated Fine Gael voter. I think at its core, Fine Gael really is about the long-term prosperity of Ireland and not just the quick buck, like some other parties i won't mention. However it is frustrating seeing Fine Gael move from one PR mess to another and rarely coming in with that cutting edge that all opposition parties need.
As for Communism, it looks good in theory but in practice, on this planet, it never seemed to improve the lot of the ordinary worker on the whole. One thing i'll give you is that at least the cubans have a half decent health service.

I fully agree, i think they more or less have the interests of the country at heart. They bring out some stupid things like funding the eircom shareholders and paying off the taxi drivers, but most people don't hear about they way they wish to curb corp donations and clean up politics as a whole (reduce the number of TDs in Lenister House).

I think they should remove EK as leader and put in Richard Bruton, as he is much more charasmatic.

star gazer

I think they should remove EK as leader and put in Richard Bruton, as he is much more charasmatic.
bloggs

I would have chosen Richard Bruton in in the leadership contest last year. He comes accross as both human and intelligent. He appears to be ploughing a lonely furrow at the moment. However, if there is another leadership challenge it would rip Fine Gael apart and they wouldn't get the time to rebuild after yet another leader culling for Richard Bruton to get a real chance..

Sparks

Hmmm. Eomer, if you had a "none of the above" option, would you vote then?

Lenin

Originally posted by bloggs
This is a very strange question. You don't like democracy, but you want know who who we would vote for?

Democracy in my opinion is not perfect but it's certainly the best thing we have. If we lived under your Marxist-Leninist regime, surely we wouldn't have democracy, so if we didn't like marxism who the hell would we get rid of it (apart from forceably removing it)? That is why political movements like communism/marxism and facism will no longer work. People like to have a choice, and if they don't like the current regime they can vote them out. Not really much chance of that with someone like Stalin incharge

BTW, i would probably vote FG.

If you lived under a Marxist-Leninist 'Regime' then no you wouldn't have 'democracy', not in the way you know it anyway. The prolateriat would own the country, you just wouldn't have parliamentarianism. The only reason you wouldn't like Marxism is if you were previously part of the elite and you wouldn't even get a chance to get rid of it if you were.

What makes you think you can change the rulers in a 'democratic' country? Another member said it below, most systems are 2-party with both parties near identical, with no real change ever going to be attempted.

Greetings Lenin - I am a Marxist Leninist (Trotskyist) and I do not vote (at least until the next assembly election when the Socialist Party are running several single issue candidates and probably one outright socialist candidate.

If I voted, naturally I would vote Socialist Party.

The question now is, as per rules of posts, who do YOU vote for and why ask the question?

PS If you are Workers Party, Communist Party or SWP then we're going to have words

I would probably vote Socialist Party becasue of a lack of real candidates. I just wanted to find out who voted for who simply. Nice intro to the forums I thought : ) I want to talk more to you about this somewhere else perhaps. BTW glad to see another Marxist here.

Oh, please, please, please, lets not have a continuous ranting thread about how great Marxism/Leninism/Stalinism/Socialism/Greenism is and how capitalism is ruining the world.

Why not, have their been others on this forum? Or are you just an ignorant capitalist? No offence.

I mean at the moment there is no party or candidate that I could ever bring myself to activly support. And even if there was the chances of them getting into power is zero.

There is a reason for this. You should have no doubt that there is a ruling class and they will do anything to keep you from ridding them out of power.

Anyway, you're perfectly entitled to your view on Marxism / Democracy, but we live in a democracy where people are fairly happy to vote to keep it that way, and you are in a very small minority.

Thank you, we live in 'democracy', you have no real choice in what goes on. You are a slave. Well you can't exactly vote to change to a dictatorship, a dictatorship of the prolateriat in my case. It must come from armed revolt. I am in a very small minority for a reason also, the bourgeoise want to keep it that way. They control the media and everything else. The Werstern 'democracies' have been releasing 'facts' (lies/propaganda) for years against communists/socialists. Did you know we eat babies and torture everybody. Not to mind we kick cute bunny rabbits in our sparetime. If they want it, you will believe it.

As for Communism, it looks good in theory but in practice, on this planet, it never seemed to improve the lot of the ordinary worker on the whole. One thing i'll give you is that at least the cubans have a half decent health service.

It doesn't work in practise because of the situations that came with it individually. Nearly every communist/socialist country ever has been attacked economically and militarily by the United States and their crew of Justice.


Well, glad to meet you all.

SkepticOne

Originally posted by Lenin
It doesn't work in practise because of the situations that came with it individually. Nearly every communist/socialist country ever has been attacked economically and militarily by the United States and their crew of Justice.

Hmmm, I'm not sure Ireland would do too well in a war against the US. I recommend you start with Russia. First of all, a lot of them probably still remember that Marxist stuff from school and so it should be easy to pick up again. Like riding a bike from what I've heard. Secondly, they have Nukes.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Skeptic One
Hmmm, I'm not sure Ireland would do too well in a war against the US. I recommend you start with Russia. First of all, a lot of them probably still remember that Marxist stuff from school and so it should be easy to pick up again. Like riding a bike from what I've heard. Secondly, they have Nukes

Theory of World Revolution. Read it.

As for Russia, when Russia HAD a revolution, the US did send over troops and money to aid the whites, just as the Brits, Germans and French did.

mr_angry

Thank you, we live in 'democracy', you have no real choice in what goes on. You are a slave. Well you can't exactly vote to change to a dictatorship, a dictatorship of the prolateriat in my case.

I disagree. Entirely. And I should give some kind of example here, but I couldn't be arsed explaining anything so blatantly obvious.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that Ireland is hindered by the fact that it is ruled by the elected representitives of the intelligent, sane, and competent people of our country, somewhat akin to yourself and myself? I think not. And as it happens, I'm a socialist, and I'd rather live in Cuba than the USA, but that does not mean I have to think that every democratic country is a corrupt, slavery-endorsing aristocracy!

ColinM

NewsTalk 106 conducted a poll today amongst its listeners and did some vox-pops around Dublin to determine who people would vote for if an election was held now. The results were fairly surprising.

Most people said that they would actually vote for Fianna Fáil, even though they felt that the government was not doing a good job. The general feedback was that even though they are doing a bad job, every other party would be worse. Basically, the feeling was that there is no credible alternative, so it would be best to "stick with the devil you know".

25% of those who took part in the poll said that they would not vote - for essentially the same reason - they do not feel that there is any credible alternative - so why bother voting!

sceptre

Originally posted by ColinM
The general feedback was that even though they are doing a bad job, every other party would be worse. Basically, the feeling was that there is no credible alternative, so it would be best to "stick with the devil you know".

Ah yes. The old problem of

"hmmm, well I've been drinking from this bottle for six years now and it makes me feel quite ill really so I know it's poisonous. There's another bottle over there in the corner but that might be /poisonous/ so I think I'll just stick to the one that's poisonous and makes me sick thanks"

ColinM

Yes, but it is understandable - a person may be used to the particular effect the poison is already having. A different kind of poison may have new and even more toxic effects.

For the 25% of people who will not vote because there's no alternative - there is. It's called spoiling your vote. Draw a new box labelled "none of the above" on the ballot paper and neatly place a tick in it. That's a much better statement of dissatisfaction than staying at home.

ColinM

See here for information about how to check if you are on the electoral register and if not, how to get on it if you are eligible.

On a side note, I like the way you got into the spirit of things for International Talk Like A Pirate Day there Sceptre.

Aaargh, paying comfort phone rental on your Eircom bill? Find out how to stop the scurvy-eaten dogs taking your pieces of eight in this thread. Yo ho ho

I gave a powerpoint presentation to several important clients in the style of Long John Silver. I used the word "gangplank" alot. I managed to make it sound quite sexually obscene. I don't believe they understood the joke.

mr_angry

That's some funny sh*t, that is.

star gazer

There's another bottle over there in the corner but that might be /poisonous/ so I think I'll just stick to the one that's poisonous and makes me sick thanks
sceptre

It is a conundrum isn't it... The problem may be that the poisonous bottle in hand is actually getting worse

all power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely

so in essence the argument could be made there will come a point at which the aforementioned bottle's toxicity actually becomes more sickening than the alternative. Have we reached that point yet? I believe so, there appears to be a certain distance growing between the person on the street and the government.
If we had communism we would be stuck with the same leader for too long. Bertie until he's 65!

Lenin

Originally posted by mr_angry4
I disagree. Entirely. And I should give some kind of example here, but I couldn't be arsed explaining anything so blatantly obvious.

Are you seriously trying to suggest that Ireland is hindered by the fact that it is ruled by the elected representitives of the intelligent, sane, and competent people of our country, somewhat akin to yourself and myself? I think not. And as it happens, I'm a socialist, and I'd rather live in Cuba than the USA, but that does not mean I have to think that every democratic country is a corrupt, slavery-endorsing aristocracy!

Yes 'socialist'.

http://www.internationalism.org/wr/244_weapon.htm

SkepticOne

Originally posted by ColinM
Yes, but it is understandable - a person may be used to the particular effect the poison is already having. A different kind of poison may have new and even more toxic effects.

For the 25% of people who will not vote because there's no alternative - there is. It's called spoiling your vote. Draw a new box labelled "none of the above" on the ballot paper and neatly place a tick in it. That's a much better statement of dissatisfaction than staying at home.

But the spoiled vote could be considered an extension of the 'devil you know' syndrome: "I'm scared to change the status quo, so I'll let others do the deciding for me."

Sparks

For the 25% of people who will not vote because there's no alternative - there is. It's called spoiling your vote. Draw a new box labelled "none of the above" on the ballot paper and neatly place a tick in it. That's a much better statement of dissatisfaction than staying at home.

That's not a protest. Spoilt votes, whether caused by ineptness or political protest, are binned. End of story. The net effect is that the election carries on regardless. Which means that the decision is made by those that do not spoil their vote, and there's always enough people benefiting from corrupt politicians that they'll get elected.

In fact, the only reason spoilt votes are even counted once is so you know what the voter turnout was - you could quite legally have a 98% voter turnout (hence a legal election), and have a total of 10 votes that were not spoilt, and the election would then be decided on by those ten votes.

Not an effective protest at all.

Plus, the next general election is supposedly to be held on those new electronic voting boxes and that means that you physically cannot spoil your vote.

No, what's needed is an offical, counted, legal, "none of the above" option on the ballot.
Hence the None of the Above campaign.

Éomer of Rohan

Lenin, do you fancy doing a little better than just posting a link and making a snide comment? I'm quite interested to hear your OWN in depth point of view on Mr Angry's comments.

Von

Originally posted by ColinM
I gave a powerpoint presentation to several important clients in the style of Long John Silver. I used the word "gangplank" alot. I managed to make it sound quite sexually obscene. I don't believe they understood the joke.

Wow. Crazy. Is this you?

DadaKopf

I don't care about where the argument is going. Start a theory discussion elsewhere. It's nice to see Vladamir rose from the dead (which is impressive considering his brain's in some jar somewhere) so I'll answer his question.

I, personally, vote Green. Why? I find myself agreeing with their policies and I think they've got it goin' on that way. That said, many friends of mine who have been involved with the Greens say they're just like all the other Irish parties - careerists, concerned more with their jobs than real politics.

But you have to choose someone (in my opinion) so I vote Green and Labour.

Every time I vote, I don't vote for FF, FG or PD because I'm deliberately using my vote to do my part to forge a new party system which will hopefully inject some new blood and life into our stagnant political culture.

And yes, I think the Greens, if they became better organised, could be a formidible opposition. Unfortunately, they're currently too urban-based and so must attract the interests of well-minded farmers, too.

Von

I'm registered in Meath and voted for the Greens and er, the CSP, in the last election. It took over 20 years for my town to get a secondary school. For FF and FG, it was quite a useful "political football" as I recall.

mr_angry

Yes 'socialist'.

http://www.internationalism.org/wr/244_weapon.htm

I don't mean to slag off people's honest opinions, but I think that is a very unbalanced article. To me, its just a very left-wing person trying to force anti-disestablishmentarianism (sorry!) down the throats of impressionable readers.

I also appreciate that communism has a bad reputation because the US attacked every country implementing the idiology, but its failure can't be attributed to that single point. People seem, from my perspective, to be better off in democratic countries than in communist ones. I don't think US foreign policy is the only factor to blame for that.

DadaKopf

Even though Marxism is direct democracy.

UH OH!

The Corinthian

Originally posted by DadaKopf
Even though Marxism is direct democracy.

Sure they're all democracies - Even the corporatist one's! :rolleyes:

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Mr Angry
I also appreciate that communism has a bad reputation because the US attacked every country implementing the idiology, but its failure can't be attributed to that single point. People seem, from my perspective, to be better off in democratic countries than in communist ones. I don't think US foreign policy is the only factor to blame for that.

Correct. One, the revolution occured in Russia, the weakest link in the capitalist chain without the worker's institutions inherent in the capitalist pseudo democracies of the West in which Marx claimed the revolution must first occur for it to work. Therefore it was possible for the dictatorship to creep in and thence for the 'Socialism in One Country' Stalinist theory to destroy any chance the USSR had of being corrected by outside since this was effectively a nationalist point of view. Then, secondly, there was the attack on Russia by Germany which killed millions of workers - some who were Stakhanovite heroes in the pre-war USSR and stood up against the petty nepotism and corruption of the Party, which was by this time institutionalised, much like the Committee for Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission are institutionalised in the USA and provide the manpower for the important governmental positions in both Democratic and Republican administrations. Finally there was the incompetence and lack of initiative engendered by Stalin's purges against the working class which resulted in the stagnation of a communist society and the failure of the most important parts of the revolution.

That all regimes since 1917 which underwent 'communist' revolution based their ideologies on Stalinism in order to get Soviet aid was their downfall - that is something the Americans, for the most part, are not to blame for. Mind you they hardly ease the situation with a destroyer blockade around Cuba or the slaughter of 4 million Vietnamese, Laosians and Cambodians.

Biffa Bacon

Why do Commies seem to think that they would waltz into power if only the corporate meeja weren't biased against them?

Well I've got news for you guys. The reason no one votes for Communists is pretty much the same reason why no one votes for Fascists...it's because it's a bat**** insane ideology that has MURDERED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS around the world.

And don't give me the "no honest, this time it will be different" spin, because we've already seen Eomer express genocidal views on different threads and Lenin has declared himself to be anti-democratic and in favour of political violence on this one.

Meh

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
Correct. One, the revolution occured in Russia, the weakest link in the capitalist chain without the worker's institutions inherent in the capitalist pseudo democracies of the West in which Marx claimed the revolution must first occur for it to work. Therefore it was possible for the dictatorship to creep in and thence for the 'Socialism in One Country' Stalinist theory to destroy any chance the USSR had of being corrected by outside since this was effectively a nationalist point of view. Then, secondly, there was the attack on Russia by Germany which killed millions of workers - some who were Stakhanovite heroes in the pre-war USSR and stood up against the petty nepotism and corruption of the Party, which was by this time institutionalised, much like the Committee for Foreign Relations, the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission are institutionalised in the USA and provide the manpower for the important governmental positions in both Democratic and Republican administrations. Finally there was the incompetence and lack of initiative engendered by Stalin's purges against the working class which resulted in the stagnation of a communist society and the failure of the most important parts of the revolution.

Doesn't say much for Marx and his theories about "historical inevitablity", if all communist revolutions are so easily corrupted...

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
Why do Commies seem to think that they would waltz into power if only the corporate meeja weren't biased against them?

Well I've got news for you guys. The reason no one votes for Communists is pretty much the same reason why no one votes for Fascists...it's because it's a bat**** insane ideology that has MURDERED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS around the world.

And don't give me the "no honest, this time it will be different" spin, because we've already seen Eomer express genocidal views on different threads and Lenin has declared himself to be anti-democratic and in favour of political violence on this one.

I would like to see the points you raise here answered as they seem valid.
People generally vote for who ever for their own selfish interests, regardless of whether they are open about this or not.
The perception , that most people probably have of communism and Fascism runs counter to their own interests by and large.
The stable door, by now, in 2003 has long since been left wide open regarding, peoples possibilities in a capitalist world.
The horse has truly bolted and is so far off in the distance now, that the Devil that is capitalism would require an opium much more potent than Religion ever was, for to convince people that they must relinquish its freedom and possibilities in favour of a communist or fascist altenative, in my honest opinion.

mm

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from Meh
Doesn't say much for Marx and his theories about "historical inevitablity", if all communist revolutions are so easily corrupted.

That statement doesn't say much for your history or politics teachers. One communist revolution was corrupted through a device Marx himself predicted and I have outlined on many occasions - so the revolution was still inline with Marxist theory but the course ceased to be Marxist and non-Marxist principles were practised, as predicted by Marx.

As a result of the pre-eminence of the lesser hegemon, the USSR, other revolutions occured which were not communist at all but assumed that guise in order to recieve military and financial aid from Russia which liked to consider itself communist, therefore common sense dictates that sharing an ideology with Russia would bring aid - that ideology was Stalinism. A prime example of this is Cuba.

Further revolutions occured also which were indirectly influenced by Stalin in a genuine way - ie the theoreticians were actual Stalinists rather than proper communists or opportunists and led their 'revolution' in the form envisioned by Stalin, incorrectly of course.

Marx' theory of historical inevitability is not even implicated in these series of events.

When the last of the 'communist' powers loose their guise - ie Vietnam, NKPR, PRC, Cuba etc etc etc become capitalist or 'social democratic' (diet capitalist or capitalist-lite) nations in the manner that the PRC is already progressing and workers struggle, then people will return to the true ideals of communism rather than an ignorant and uneducated perception thereof, misbegot from the failures in Russia.

Éomer of Rohan

Quoted from BB
Why do Commies seem to think that they would waltz into power if only the corporate meeja weren't biased against them?

Reference that from a proper communist source and then I'll accept that it's accurate.

Quoted from BB
The reason no one votes for Communists is pretty much the same reason why no one votes for Fascists...it's because it's a bat**** insane ideology that has MURDERED HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS around the world

You have stated this misconception who knows how many times and each time I reply to you, you refuse to listed to the answer. I refuse to waste more time replying to the same trolling drivel over and over again.

If you want a proper discussion, PM me and stop forever posting this clichéd rubbish.

Quoted from BB
And don't give me the "no honest, this time it will be different" spin, because we've already seen Eomer express genocidal views on different threads

Genocide; 'deliberate extermination of a race of people.'

Nowhere have I advocated that, stop trying to be sensationalist.

ColinM

Originally posted by Sparks
That's not a protest. Spoilt votes, whether caused by ineptness or political protest, are binned. End of story. The net effect is that the election carries on regardless. Which means that the decision is made by those that do not spoil their vote, and there's always enough people benefiting from corrupt politicians that they'll get elected.
[...]
Not an effective protest at all.

I take your point alright, but imagine if the people who stayed at home on polling day arrived en-masse to spoil their votes. The government could not claim that all of them had "accidentally" spoiled their votes. In the last general election, only 63% of the electorate voted. Of that 63%, 41.5% voted for Fianna Fáil. That is 26% of the electorate. You would of course hope that the 37% of the electorate that didn't vote would turn up and vote for anyone but FF, but it's logical to assume that if they were forced to vote that their voting pattern would probably reflect the existing voting pattern.
What I would like to see is an election result where the people who wouldn't ordinarily vote, turn up to spoil their vote by writing "none of the above" on the ballot paper (in the absence of a genuine none of the above option). Could you imagine the furore if we had a general election result like this:
"None of the above":37%, FF:26%, FG:14%, Lab:7%, Other: 7%, SF:4%, PD:2.5%, Green:2.5%
Now that's a much better protest than simply not turning up. If a low-voter turnout is discussed in post-election TV and radio debates, "voter apathy" is often suggested, but the reasons for the voter apathy can only be guessed at and cannot be proved to be the case. If everybody turned up to vote and "none of the above" won, it would send a very clear and unambiguous message that everybody is dissatisfied enough to turn up, and that they are not happy with the "choice" of representatives that they are given. It would not be possible for the fact that so many people had spoiled their votes in this manner to be kept secret.

Plus, the next general election is supposedly to be held on those new electronic voting boxes and that means that you physically cannot spoil your vote.

It had occurred to me that this would be a problem alright!

No, what's needed is an offical, counted, legal, "none of the above" option on the ballot.
Hence the None of the Above campaign.

I had heard of this campaign alright. I hope it succeeds, but somehow I don't see it happening.

Originally posted by Von
Wow. Crazy. Is this you?

Yes, although I've grown the hair longer and put on a few pounds since that photo was taken.

bloggs

Originally posted by Lenin
If you lived under a Marxist-Leninist 'Regime' then no you wouldn't have 'democracy', not in the way you know it anyway. The prolateriat would own the country, you just wouldn't have parliamentarianism. The only reason you wouldn't like Marxism is if you were previously part of the elite and you wouldn't even get a chance to get rid of it if you were.

But what if the majority didnt like it? We liked to have more than one TV channel or we liked more than one type of car? We didn't like queuing from our bowl or rice or loaf of bread. How do you suggest we remove the gegime?

This is what i dislike most about communism/marxism is that once it's in place you can't get rid of it (except by force or it's own demise)

Also do you serious believe that if we had a your regime tomorrow, i could protest against it, or would i be taken away by the secret police to be never seen again?

gurramok

Originally posted by ColinM
For the 25% of people who will not vote because there's no alternative - there is. It's called spoiling your vote. Draw a new box labelled "none of the above" on the ballot paper and neatly place a tick in it. That's a much better statement of dissatisfaction than staying at home.

Hate to say this but some people deliberately strike themselves off the electoral register to avoid the indirect taxes being imposed.
I know a few people in my estate who have done this so the council authorites cant track who lives in what household and determine what income levels there are.

Most of the culprits are sons/daughters(often single living at home) of the homeowners rather than the homeowners themselves who often state when questioned that their offspring is either living away from home/living with relative/travelling the world/emigrated/
They are careful not to put their name to any document(eg household bill, bank\credit union statement) that ties them to an address for a long time which would be eligible for tax, (remember residential tax ?)
Same applies for when submitting a home address for a job, they change it often to cause confusion for the authorities to track.
Call it fraud or whatever but it does goes on.