Contrast the ways of ‘democracy’

Written By: - Date published: 6:56 pm, November 8th, 2008 - 6 comments
Categories: election 2008 - Tags:

How not to vote (BBC)

How not to vote (BBC)

How not to vote (Economist)

How not to vote (Economist)

I’m happy to say that when I crawled out of my sickbed and voted this morning, it was nothing like the photos on the top and left.

I gather that we had queues at some of the major booths later in the day – Edendale primary (my old school) in Mt Albert for instance. However the contrast between the “democracy” displayed in these photo’s of the US and what we had today in NZ was immense. As No Right Turn pointed out the underfunded electoral system in the USA seems to be designed to disenfranchise voters.

So what’s wrong with this picture? Simply that it shouldn’t exist. The idea that people would have to queue for more than five minutes to vote in any advanced western democracy is absurd. The idea that they would be queuing out the door, for hours to do so is positively third-world. It speaks of an election apparatus so hideously underresourced that is simply not fit for purpose – unless the purpose is to stop people from voting rather than enable it.

Compared to the couple of minutes to do my vote today, the system in the self-professed democratic USA is strange. I’m just glad that we have a better funded and capable electoral commission out there. Thanks for your efforts leading up to this election.

Oh and the comments are now enabled.

6 comments on “Contrast the ways of ‘democracy’ ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. TrueTone 1
    8 November 2008 at 9:09 pm

    Have to say I agree, but might this not also be because the US has a huge population?

  2. zANavAShi 2
    8 November 2008 at 9:23 pm

    Not in my opinion TrueTone.

    If you study some of the recent documentaries of stolen elections in the states over the last few decades I think you’ll come to the same conclusion I have, which is that it’s a comment about the state of their democracy rather than the state of their population.

    It’s not in the interests of the ruling elite to make it easy or encouraging for the poor and working classes to vote. As already commented on another thread here tonight, a high voter turnout is never a good thing for the right.

    PS: Yayyyyyy No Right Turn – “right” on money as always!!! 😉

  3. Pascal's bookie 3
    8 November 2008 at 9:33 pm

    The unnecessarily long wait times in the US, with voting taking place on a working day, amount to a poll tax. Simple as that really.

  4. Lew 4
    9 November 2008 at 1:53 am

    There’ve been no stolen elections in USia in recent times. 2000 was stolen fair and square by legitimate constitutional means.

    L

  5. Andrensath 5
    9 November 2008 at 9:39 am

    There’ve been no stolen elections in USia in recent times. 2000 was stolen fair and square by legitimate constitutional means.

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  6. Lew 6
    9 November 2008 at 9:48 am

    Andrensath: Heh, you noticed.

    I mean people call it stolen, but it wasn’t actually – the Supremes were the properly-constituted authority to decide whether the recount should proceed, and they decided it shouldn’t.

    L

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.