In this essay, I will argue the side that compulsory voting does in fact reduce people’s freedom. By making voting compulsory, it takes away people’s freedom not to vote therefore reduce freedom (which comes under negative freedom). Although, it can be disputed and compulsory voting does not in fact reduce freedom because it depends how far one would go with the word ‘compulsory’ as in many ways this is not exactly true.
It is important to note that voting has been a source of controversy for a long time as a result of exclusion of certain minority groups, including women and minority ethnic groups. This has led to significant uprising within the groups. In the late 19th and early 20th century, the suffragette movement became very significant in getting votes for women in the United Kingdom. A noteworthy event within this time period was when Emily Davison was killed by the King’s horse in the Epsom Derby 1913. This was a clear indication of how important voting was and in 1918, women were granted the right to vote in the United Kingdom. Before women (and other minority groups) were given the right to vote, they did not have freedom like all those who could vote. This shows that even if compulsory voting is used, there is still more freedom then there was back when many were disallowed. People may become ‘less free’ but they still have the right to vote, therefore exhibiting some sort of freedom that was once not there.
Firstly, I believe that compulsory voting does in fact reduce the freedom of the people as it hinders people’s negative freedom. Negative freedom was first introduced by Isiah Berlin in his book ‘Two concepts of Liberty’ in 1958. He suggested that instead of there being a single definition for freedom/liberty, it could be broken into both negative and positive freedom which I will go on to explain later on. Negative freedom can be defined as the freedom from any outside interference. For example, in the bill of rights which are the first ten amendments to the constitution in the United States are clear samples of where be negative freedom is present. Therefore, by having compulsory voting people’s negative freedom is disrupted because this would be outside interference towards the people and ultimately people will become less free.
As suggested in the book ‘Compulsory Voting’ by Brennan and Hill, Berlin’s concept of liberty would dispute compulsory voting as any compulsion is in violation of negative freedom.
In the following paragraph, I will counter the argument mentioned about as one could argue that although compulsory voting does hinder negative freedom it also encourages positive freedom. Positive freedom is being free to act upon one’s will and having entitlement to do so. Also, it can be defined as collective self-rule which would mean that positive freedom is obviously enhanced when voting is made compulsory. This is because if everyone is voting then the final result will be a collective decision and this aligns with positive freedom. Additionally, compulsory voting would mean people act upon their obligation as citizens and therefore they are behaving more democratically. One may argue that acting more democratically needs freedom to do so, therefore people’s freedom is not reduced.
In this paragraph, I will discuss a further argument in favour of compulsory voting reducing freedom. In many states, people are granted the freedom of speech which basically means that people have the right/power to express their own opinion without restraint, censorship or any legal penalty. When someone votes they exercise part of this freedom in being able to vote for whoever they want. I would argue that the freedom of speech is also the freedom to not speak and so when it comes to voting, people should not be obliged to vote. Many people do not vote for a number of reasons including dissatisfaction with the government or that they know their vote will not count as they are in a ‘safe seat’.
The counter argument to this would be that although there is compulsory voting, in many cases people are not being forced in a sense they are just being somewhat threatened with a fine. For example, in Australia, first time non-voters are fined $20 and repeat non-voters are fined $50. This means that people have a decision to make on whether they will vote or pay the fine. They are free to do which ever one they choose and compulsory voting is just advisory/recommended otherwise a fine will be imposed. Therefore, in this sense, people have the option to vote or not vote so people’s freedom is not reduced as suggested in the question.
Hillel Steiner would take this view as he would agree that people are not being physically forced to go and vote whereas they are being advised otherwise expect punishment, in the form of a fine. This results in people not having their freedom reduced when compulsory voting is introduced as they still have the ability to decide whether they want to vote or not.
Another argument in favour of compulsory voting reducing people’s freedom would be did not choose to be born into the society.
This paragraph will offer a counter argument to the one mentioned before, which sides with compulsory voting not reducing freedom is that of tacit consent theory as offered by John Locke (also known as silent consent). This can be used in the context of a member of society remaining in society and receiving benefits, they are giving their consent to whatever takes place and therefore if compulsory voting is implemented then the person should therefore oblige with it as they have consented to all procedures in the society by remaining a member. By having this silent consent, people are not therefore having their negative freedom reduced as they can still act without interference by leaving the society.
To summarise this essay, I argued that compulsory voting does actually reduce people’s freedom in a number of ways and I tried to look at the opposing argument to this and use thoughts of political scholars and authors to help explain my reasoning. The main reasons for believing that compulsory voting reduces freedom would be that it takes away people’s freedom not to speak as one would have to vote. Also, because compulsory voting hinders people’s negative freedom which is being able to act without interference which is clearly what occurs when compulsory voting is done. Although there are arguments to counter mine, I still do not think that they are sufficient enough to help sway my belief.
2017-11-16-1510849418