
Does compulsory voting violate our freedoms of speech and religion?
For this first episode, we’re going to do a brief rundown on compulsory voting. Compulsory voting is not a new concept. Belgium instituted it in 1894. Interestingly enough, the State of Georgia initially had a clause in their state constitution saying that all male white inhabitants, of the age of twenty-one years, so on and so forth, must vote by ballot personally. This was undone about 12 years later, but the idea of forcing citizens to vote isn’t anything new. Today, 15 countries enforce compulsory voting, and another 8 have it in their laws but there’s really no punishment for not voting there. Compulsory voting is actually enforced in North Korea, although only one candidate appears on the ballot.
Australia has had a long and rather successful run with compulsory voting. While they, as any country, go through their political swings and cycles, their voting system allows for a more moderate change in politics by getting the silent majority into the votes. Jonathan Levine writes: “All U.S. presidents are charged with representing not just those who vote for them but all Americans. Yet as more and more people choose to abstain, elected officials rule with less and less consent … We scoff when … dictators are “elected” with 99 percent of the vote, yet … [its] … almost as sobering that Bill Clinton became president in 1992 when more than 75 percent of the electorate did not vote for him.”
Compulsory voting leads to a more representative government. There is some truth to the idea that the media in the United States is, willingly or unwillingly, catering to extremes on both sides. While I don’t think being an enlightened centrist is inherently correct, its a good place to start and better than nothing. Just don’t say to yourself that the parties are the same or imply that they’re both correct. They’re not. Could it be the case that progressive wing parties are correct on some issues and conservative wing parties are correct on others? Absolutely. But don’t fall into blanket beliefs and misbeliefs about both sides of an issue. Be aware of your biases. You can get ideas from both sides, just do the research for yourself. THEN, form your opinion. If you don’t, then you’re just another victim to cognitive biases.
Plato wrote about gaining knowledge in his seventh book of The Republic: “Bodily exercise, when compulsory, does no harm to the body; but knowledge which is acquired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind.” Nowhere does this principle have more weight than in discussions regarding compulsory voting in the United States. In standing against such a policy, I have two core arguments. The first argument will demonstrate that instituting compulsory voting in this nation greatly interferes with our freedoms, specifically speech and religion. The second argument will propose a criticism of forced democracy and explain how mandating complete involvement in the political decisions of our country will not improve its well-being.

First, compulsory voting violates our right to free speech. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson wrote:
“Without promise of a limiting Bill of Rights, it is doubtful if our Constitution could have mustered enough strength to enable its ratification. To enforce those rights today is not to choose weak government over strong government. It is only to adhere as a means of strength to individual freedom of mind in preference to officially disciplined uniformity for which history indicates a disappointing and disastrous end.”
This comes from the West Virginia Board v. Barnette (1943) case, which ruled that “We set up government by consent of the governed, and the Bill of Rights denies those in power any legal opportunity to coerce that consent … no official, high or petty, can … force citizens to confess by word or act their faith.” The government simply does not, and should not, have the ability to force its citizens to present a vote of confidence in someone they do not know. Citizen protection from government-compelled speech has been upheld multiple times, including in Wooley v. Maynard (1977) and Rumsfeld v. Forum (2006). Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. stated in Rumsfield: “Some of this Court’s leading First Amendment precedents have established the principle that freedom of speech prohibits the government from telling people what they must say.” Since compulsory voting is an act of compelled speech, it violates the First Amendment and should not be upheld.
Second, compulsory voting infringes on our right to the free exercise of religious practices. The Supreme Court ruled in Torcaso v. Watkins (1961) that the Government cannot “pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion.” Many religious groups including Christadelphians and Jehovah’s Witnesses, “remain resolutely neutral with regard to the political affairs of the nations.” This means that those groups, among others, do not participate in politics unless they feel there is a candidate who truly represents their beliefs, instead of just choosing the lesser of two evils. By forcing our citizen’s hands, we are not only showing no regard to their first amendment rights and its later Supreme Court interpretations, but we are also undermining the ideals this country seemed to have been founded upon.
The second argument against compulsory voting will, unlike the first, undermine what some consider an important foundation in our country: and that is democracy. Before we consider this claim, it is crucial to clarify that by instituting compulsory voting, we will also in effect be instituting an increased level of democracy. This is because, by definition, all citizens will be voting instead of allowing people to abstain. With that said, while almost all Americans seem to view democracy as “very important” to the United States, some more notable political philosophers in history have considered it less than ideal. Plato, for instance, ranked it fourth out of only five types of governments, second worst only to tyranny in The Republic. Loren Samons writes:
“…the people that gave rise to and practiced ancient democracy left us almost nothing but criticism of this form of regime. And what is more, the actual history of Athens in the period of its democratic government is marked by numerous failures, mistakes, and misdeeds that would seem to discredit this ubiquitous modern idea that democracy leads to good government.”

But a critical thing to note here is that philosophers rarely think of these regimes as discrete ideas. They are viewed as progressions on one another, meaning each leads to the next. Karl Marx, for example, didn’t believe socialism was simply a beneficial system: he believed it would come from an inevitable fall of capitalism. He argued that the only way people would support socialism was if capitalism fails them. You couldn’t just jump to socialism (as some countries have tried): it had to progress. Likewise, Plato didn’t simply believe democracy was second-worst only to tyranny: he believed democracy would lead to tyranny. He argues this through the idea of ochlocracy, or mob rule. This occurs when significant power is vested in all citizens, giving them the ability to run, and eventually ruin a nation. Again, in his work The Republic, Plato writes, “Democracy, which is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, dispenses a sort of equality to equals and unequaled alike.” Mob rule has spurred heinous events throughout history, including, but certainly not limited to, the dislocation and systematic killings of Native Americans, the Salem Witch Trials, and the racist mob lynchings and farce prosecutions of the 20th century that still happen today.
If the point has not yet been portrayed, Plato simply did not believe the average citizen should be the judge, jury, and executioner of his country. He believed in an aristocracy, or a government that is ran by a high class, but not the high class we think of today. Instead of privileged, white billionaires he argued for a state run by the intelligent class (he describes them as “philosopher-kings”). While I don’t advocate for an aristocracy, I do plan to expound on why the average American should not be forced into deciding our country’s fate.
The first reason is that low-informed voters are reckless voters. Because they don’t understand the policies for which candidates support, studies have shown that they base their decisions on other arbitrary factors, including candidate attractiveness (Riggle, et. al), using candidate race and gender to support the voter’s personal biases (McDermott), or the widespread issue of knowing absolutely nothing about any candidate, so simply voting for the name atop the ballot (Brockington).
The second reason may offend some but needs to be said: Americans are simply not that bright. There was a time not too long ago when our society found entertainment in a game show that tested our adult knowledge against those of fifth graders. The game that, in ninety-eight episodes, had only two winners: a state superintendent and a Physics Nobel Prize winner. Another case against the average American voter intelligence is that a study published in 2018 showed that barely one-third of Americans could pass the American Citizenship Test, ironic considering this same test is used to see if incoming citizens are worthy enough to participate in our politics. If this evidence doesn’t convince, the New York Post was kind enough to put it simply: “US adults are dumber than the average human”. This conclusion was taken from a study from the Program for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies, which found that Americans score less than average on tests designed to “assess and compare the basic skills and the broad range of competencies of adults around the world.”
Not even discussing the technical problems that instituting such a massive change would have on our society, we can see the fundamental issues with compulsory voting. It violates our freedoms of speech and religion and puts undue power in the uninformed. History has seen what happens when the biased and low-information mob starts running society. Let’s not repeat that.
What we need to do instead is two things. First, promote open-mindedness in educating ourselves on these issues. And no, being progressive doesn’t automatically qualify you as being open-minded. We, as citizens, need to start informing ourselves about what we want before we can expect government officials to start doing what we want. Too many people complain that politicians only serve themselves, but then turn around and vote for them again because they don’t have a solid opinion on the issues.
Once we’ve educated ourselves on the issues, we need to be more open to discussing them with others. There are some issues where you can agree to disagree. Other’s, not so much. Either way, getting opinions out into the open is only a win-win scenario. Let’s say Bob and Frank are arguing about who’s right. (In actuality, Frank is right, just fyi). If they were to just agree to disagree, then Bob is straight outta luck because he left that interaction without knowing what is right and Frank missed an opportunity to grow confidence in his own beliefs. But if they were to put it out there, then two things happen. Most importantly is that Bob now knows what is right, but now Frank is also that more sure of himself that he is right, and he is that much better at explaining it to the next person. And who knows, maybe Bob had a point Frank never considered before. Either way, they both come out better than before.
This is called the marketplace of ideas. James Gibson writes that “The idea of a marketplace is that anyone can put forth a product—an idea—for political “consumers” to consider. The success of the idea is determined by the level of support freely given in the market. The market encourages deliberation, through which superior ideas are found to be superior, and through which the flaws of bad ideas are exposed for all to see.” The Supreme Court supported this idea in the 1969 case Tinker v. Des Moines, in which they ruled that “our Constitution says we must take this risk… and our history says that it is this sort of hazardous freedom — this kind of openness — that is the basis of our national strength.”
There is no better way to promote education than through free speech. To quote Silverglate, French, and Lukianoff in an essay from 2005:
In his classic treatise, On Liberty (1859), the English philosopher John Stuart Mill noted that while many people claim to believe in “free speech,” in fact just about everyone has his or her own notions of what speech is dangerous, or worthless, or just plain wrong—and, for those reasons, undeserving of protection. …Mill provided a thorough, powerful, and compelling argument for unfettered free speech. Human beings are neither infallible nor all-knowing, and the opinion one despises might, in fact, be right, or, even if incorrect, “contain a portion of truth” that we would not have discovered if the opinion had been silent. Further, Mill argued, even if the opinion of the censors was the whole truth, if their ideas were not permitted to be “vigorously and earnestly contested,” we would believe the truth not as a fully understood or internalized idea, but simply as a prejudice: something we believe obstinately without being able to explain why we believe it. Mill understood…that if we did not have to defend our beliefs and values, they would lose their vitality, becoming merely rote formulas, not deep, living, and creative convictions.
The Supreme Court again supported this notion in their 1949 case Terminiello v. Chicago:
A function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute …is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment.
Forcing people to vote is not the way to go. Getting people to know for themselves what they want FIRST is what’s essential. Then, and only then, will increased voter turnout be beneficial for our country.
GreggFug
Katherine
Lillian
Alphonse
Jarrod
Cornelius
Ramiro
Shayne
Stephan
Darell
Aaron
Charlotte
Rupert
Darrel
Getjoy
Jonathon
Rusty
Tracy
Osvaldo
Mike
Lincoln
Madison
Isidro
Percy
Kendrick
Nicholas
Shelton
Marty
Lamar
Fabian
Claudio
Lawrence
Willy
Laurence
Clinton
Jimmie
Daron
Jonas
Scotty
Eugenio
Alejandro
Scott
Kristofer
Warren
Shane
Williams
Edmond
Monte
Kerry
Eddie
Eugenio
Maria
Rodrick
Irwin
Trenton
Seth
Marcelino
Irvin
Modesto
Caroline
Thurman
Jarrett
Chris
Brett
Lanny
Isiah
Philip
Erwin
Terence
Alphonso
Colin
Blake
Ethan
Zachary
Isabella
Tony
Jeremy
Dorian
Leslie
Marlon
Christoper
Thomas
Ellsworth
Arthur
Connie
Roosevelt
Aubrey
Mervin
Eugenio
Willard
Dogkill
Reginald
Cyrus
Frank
Florencio
Ismael
Wallace
Julio
Herschel
Freelove
Daron
Jerrold
Royce
Mckinley
Domingo
Hannah
Emma
Rosendo
Oswaldo
Snoopy
Mohammad
Milan
Cooler111
Nelson
Jefferson
Clifton
Ezekiel
Deshawn
Edmundo
Aubrey
Evelyn
Amber
Jefferey
Waylon
Zachery
Rubin
Emmitt
Henry
Stacey
Ashley
Autumn
Sandy
Guillermo
Kraig
Adam
Leandro
Milton
Lawrence
Ruben
Connie
Matthew
Marcellus
Andreas
Hilton
Aiden
Doyle
Rocky
Harrison
Rayford
Angelo
Blaine
Errol
Francesco
Heriberto
Emery
Thanh
Johnny
Andres
Ernesto
Carey
Kenny
Savannah
Sherman
Norbert
Isaiah
Seth
Raymundo
Madelyn
Mia
Fletcher
Mya
Donovan
Richard
Brady
Seth
Brody
Jason
Rolland
Garret
Julius
Jacinto
Neville
Kaylee
Arlie
Sebastian
Luis
Clint
Ayden
Elbert
Weldon
Ralph
Manual
Jordan
Erick
Lily
Damion
Carlo
Florentino
Kevin
Solomon
Leroy
Quincy
Laverne
Connor
Randolph
Winford
Howard
Malcom
Eldon
Elijah
Ollie
Delmar
Jose
Edward
Wiley
Herschel
Francis
Elijah
Chuck
Jacques
Harris
Kaylee
Brice
Emma
Ferdinand
Blaine
Gavin
Francesco
Clemente
Marlon
Horacio
Miguel
Molly
Galen
Tomas
Rupert
Myron
Collin
Janni
Allen
Vincent
Johnathon
Jeramy
Norris
Theodore
Ronny
Donald
Hilton
Elias
Clayton
Harvey
Arianna
Denver
Boyce
Victoria
Terence
Spencer
Donnell
Herman
Coco888
Mason
Werner
Stuart
Morris
Razer22
Alden
Darryl
Daniel
Columbus
Barbera
Shelby
Rikky
Wiley
Sarah
Getjoy
Glenn
Jane
Chung
Fermin
Johnny
Whitney
Bertram
Bernardo
Goodboy
Edmundo
John
Hubert
Patricia
Ralph
Blake
Merrill
Jarrett
Bradford
Darius
Randy
Benny
Gerry
Waldo
Buddy
Broderick
Eldon
Payton
Victor
Elliot
Walker
Dominick
Carol
Madeline
Grace
Angel
Emma
Emmitt
Nicky
Lewis
Luke
Alonzo
Mohammed
Lamar
Antonia
Lonny
Emile
Mitchel
Ramiro
Jane
Luis
Hosea
Roosevelt
Larry
Jermaine
Jefferey
Jaden
Alden
Jerold
Harlan
Isaac
Sammy
Lowell
Jasper
Joesph
Freeman
Michelle
Hosea
Erich
Chadwick
Bryce
Shayne
Walter
Keneth
Edward
George
Freddy
Miguel
Adolph
Zachariah
Linwood
Noble
Sophie
Kevin
Sanford
James
Eli
Anna
Jeromy
Jessie
Brendon
Crazyfrog
Aurelio
Jesse
Darwin
Luther
Israel
Louie
Elliott
Kayla
Johnathan
Shaun
Gabrielle
Connie
Mauro
Chadwick
Gracie
Bruce
Rudolph
Kaitlyn
Terrance
Jeromy
Napoleon
Kylie
Josiah
Ellis
Jonas
SEO Reseller Program
AffiliateLabz
Isadora Territo
Alvin
Boris
Carmen
Daryl
Chelsie Saugis
Bessie Kennel
Deneen Sibilia
Destiny Wolff
Camie Metta
PeterSnuro
JavierKnibe
Williener
RichardMergo
PeterSnuro
Williener
RichardMergo
Clayton
PeterSnuro
sakarya escort bayan
JavierKnibe
Williener
john
Tracy
Columbus
Theron
Vida
Anibal
Kerry
Kraig
Nathaniel
Alton
Josef
Dro4er
Kelvin
Ricky
Tilburg
Hosea
Edmund
Cristobal
Andres
Jamie
Craig
Levi
Dannie
Sydney
Andrea
Brendon
Sheldon
Rhett
Michal
Nathan
Alfonzo
Delbert
Brady
Rhett
Grady
Clint
Melvin
Foster
Hassan
Denver
Cristopher
Nickolas
Collin
Allison
Rubin
Clair
Antonia
Fernando
Dghonson
Courtney
Addison
Damien
Hunter
Carey
Clark
Rueben
RichardMergo
Damion
Humberto
Patric
Lemuel
Jordon
Marion
Sergio
Osvaldo
Irving
Tyler
Alonso
Wilton
Emmanuel
Tracey
Jamison
Herschel
Coco888
Horace
Shirley
Rodrick
Joshua
Barry
Amelia
Linwood
Bertram
Jamel
Brock
Jerrod
Lenard
Davis
Alexander
Danilo
Maurice
Lance
Ezekiel
Orlando
Rueben
Buford
Rufus
Alexandra
Nelson
Cedrick
Sofia
Ellsworth
Keith
Emanuel
Lucas
Carlos
Edgardo
Dalton
Jerrod
Victoria
Geoffrey
Porter
Patric
Ellis
Harland
Garrett
Douglass
Luther
Ethan
Bernie
Errol
Graig
Duane
Ayden
Leonel
Goodsam
Ervin
Norman
Royal
Charley
Rogelio
Quaker
Jane
Jocelyn
Palmer
Angelo
Roosevelt
Garth
Marquis
Kendall
Lynwood
Pitfighter
Jarrod
Hiram
Zoey
Hector
Raphael
Adrian
Caroline
Nelson
Darius
Lioncool
Barton
Tracey
Andreas
Isabelle
Zachary
Greenwood
Fritz
Tomas
Bella
Thanh
Rudolph
Heath
Errol
Ronnie
Deangelo
Melissa
Sterling
Seth
Keven
Jonah
Ashton
Alvaro
Malik
Katelyn
Adam
Dghonson
Delbert
Felix
Ramiro
Rickey
Diana
Quincy
Pierre
Cornell
Mohammed
Gerald
Anderson