The New York Times of October 14, 2014, has this op-ed by Shiu Sin-por, head of the Central Policy Unit of the government of the Hong Kong special administrative region.
As has been well-reported, China has said that Hong Kong voters will be allowed to choose Hong Kong’s chief executive, in elections starting in 2017. But the rules say no one can run who has not been cleared by the central Chinese government in Beijing. The op-ed defends this policy, and asserts that China is keeping its promise for “universal suffrage.”
This controversy illustrates that the right to vote includes the right of choice for whom to vote, something that many in the U.S. forget. The right to vote includes more than the right to put a ballot in a box and have that vote counted. The right to vote also requires that the voter have a free choice of whom to vote for.
“The right to vote includes more than the right to put a ballot in a box and have that vote counted. The right to vote also requires that the voter have a free choice of whom to vote for.”
Very well put, Richard.
1. Keep buying the tyrant Chinese imports — to finance the DOOM of Western Civilization ???
2. P.R. and nonpartisan App.V. – in ALL regimes.
http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/dubiousquotes/a/stalin_quote.htm
North Korea technically has elections with three parties, plus some independent candidates. However, all candidates have to be approved by the government, and of course being North Korea if you don’t agree with them completely, not only do you not get on the ballot, but you get killed or sent to a slave labor camp. North Koreans may have the ability to vote, but without the choice for whom to vote, it’s meaningless.
And I think turnout in North Korea is about 99.99% for all three parties plus the handful of Independents.
I wonder if the political landscape in the United States would change is we had 99.99% turn out?
Well, if we did like North Korea where you have to vote or you die/get sentenced to years of slave labor, I’m guessing it would just encourage people to vote for the government out of fear. If we legitimately got 99.9999 percent turnout, things might change for the better, but even countries like Australia which have compulsory voting but very minor punishments for those who don’t get nowhere near that amount.
Gregory Koch:
You make a very good point. Seems like I had read somewhere some decades ago, that those who DO vote actually reflect the opinion of those who DO NOT vote.
So, if we had a 99.99% turnout, I imagine most elections would turn out about the same. Don’t know if it would help any 3rd party or Independent candidates any – other than the number of votes they receive might increase.