You're the freest country in the world but less than half of you vote.Why?

[NightTrain]

I got that question from a Canadian while I was in Montreal over the weekend. How would *you* have answered it?

[deadparrot]

1. Freest (sp?) country in the world? Pah hah. nt

[kerryin2004]

2. Are we the freest??

I am sure there are nations that can compete with our freedom..Surely Canada is one of them..As for the voting it is because so many people feel that the govt. doesn't play a role in their futures.. Also in Canada all you need is a water bill or some proof of residency to vote, where as here you have to be registered first..

[krkaufman]

3. We're not the brightest country in the world, I'd venture. n/t

[Julien Sorel]

4. Because we're so damn free, voting is an imposition on that freedom.

Was the Canadian serious, or asking a rhetorical question?

I ask this because I've never understood what it is that makes Americans say we are the "most free country in the world," or "we have the most freedoms." Exactly how could anyone know this? Is the United States in the Guinness Book of World Records under "Most freedoms of any nation?" Is there any study that attempts to rate freedom, and then present a ranking by country? Seriously, I've wondered about this for years, and no one has been able to give me an answer, yet many people assume it's a true statement.

[yvr girl]

7. Canadian here

I feel pretty free.

[Julien Sorel]

11. Bah.

"Pretty free" isn't the

most free. ;-)

Maybe we have the ultimate freedom: the freedom to be arrogant about our freedoms. Or the freedom not to learn about other countries. Or the freedom to stick our collective head in the sand. Ah well, it's just one of those things, I suppose.


Here's a question: when Bush says, "They hate us for our freedom," why is it that they don't hate other countries for their freedom? Why don't they hate the Netherlands, or Belgium, or Monaco? Hell, Netherlands and Monaco are far more Godless and heathenistic than the U.S. is by fundamentalist Muslim standards -- you'd think they would be attacking those countries, not us. But Americans never think about stuff like this, and that's one of the reasons our foreign policy is whacked out.

[NightTrain]

8. She was completely serious.

I gave that woman what I'd like to think was a rather detailed answer. I explained that the Republicans had turned American politics into a blood sport, while the Democrats (for the most part) still insist on trying to play by the rules.

I also told her that when an American election has high voter turnout, the Democrats always win. As such, the Republicans always do their best to discourage voter turnout by, among other things, making the campaigns so vicious and nasty that a lot of voters become disgusted and decide to stay home on Election Day.

Finally, I assured the woman that this year's election was looking to have the highest voter turnout since at least 1992, when we elected Bill Clinton. She seemed mildly comforted and told me that we Americans need to go to the polls in droves this year and get rid of "that terrible Mr. Bush."

ARE YOU LISTENING, AMERICA? THE WHOLE WORLD WANTS BUSH GONE, SO VOTE GODDAMMIT!!!

[coalition_unwilling]

32. This site is fond of disparaging Nader ad nauseum, but

he has argued repeatedly that the Democratic Party has deserted its natural base, i.e., the working class, in its pursuit of corporate dollars.

When workers perceive little to no difference between Dems and Repukes, is it any wonder they can't be bothered to vote? This year, the stakes are too high for any self-indulgence (speaking for myself personally), but I must confess that in 2000 I found Nader's point that there was no difference between the two parties quite compelling. Even today, when I hear him on Pacifica, his arguments are seductive.

[Cleita]

5. First, I would say that I would

be a fool to believe that I live in the most free country in the world because I know it's not the truth. The Netherlands is the most free country in the world and I would say we aren't even second or third. Now I have no idea if the Dutch bother to vote a lot or not, but I do know our system is rigged to discourage us from voting very much unless we are really hot on a particular issue or candidate.

Before anyone hops in to ask me why we are discouraged, let me explain. First, we must do it on a workday. Second, the issues are confusing and not often explained where the ordinary person understands. Our primary system for federal candidates really excludes most of the western states from partaking, if not in fact, in the way many people percieve it so that they don't bother going FROM WORK to the polls. The electoral system is not fair and many of those in the western states realize this so they figure their vote doesn't count so they don't bother.

[Swamp Rat]

10. I also find the Netherlands to be more free than the USA, and Brasil too.

The government of this country represses it's citizens in many ways, while offering hundreds of brands of breakfast cereals.

Many of the poor folks we registered in Louisiana will be turned away at the polls because not enough volunteers or money was available to process the forms by the deadline, which was yesterday. This, if it doesn't cause enough public outrage, will undoubtedly discourage them from voting again.

[Character Assassin]

37. Brasil? You mean, as in the Brasil in S. America?

Are. You. Effing. Kidding. Me?

[Booster]

12. Excellent answer, especially about the issues being

confusing. I'm in CA and we have, I think, 4 issues on the Indian casinos to vote on. I sat down today and tried to figure them out and will try again tomorrow. On most issues I usually look to see who is against and who is for, which tells you a lot. Our 3 strikes law is totally confusing because the Dems say it will force CA to release really bad and ugly people, yet I've done jury duty on 4 cases that no way should the people have been given 25 years for. Your answer is dead on, but you forgot to add we're lazy as Hell and voting is hard work. ha

[Stew225]

6. too many people exercise their freedom to not vote. eom

[Pragmatique]

9. Voting question

Apathy has always been the companion of ignorance, and many, if not most people seem to savor apathy and ignorance over political enlightenment and activism. Is it any different in Canada?

[Kanary]

13. Not any one answer...... beware of simplifications!

1. Still stuck in "rugged individualism", and whereas Europeans see themselves much more as *part* of a society, USians are hung up on their "individuality", and therefore don't see why they have a duty to educate themselves about the running of this country, and ensure the state of the democracy.

2. So many scandals and dirty-dealing that many feel like politics is something they don't want to soil themselves with.

3. As tonight's program about Robert Kennedy brought out, several huge assassinations in the 60's led a whole generation to feel hopeless and cynical.

4. Most of those who are ignored and brushed aside know that they have no real power to affect any change, and rather than disappoint themselves over and over by voting and then having those they voted for stab them in the back once in office, they give up and concentrate on things they can have an affect with.

Some of the many reasons.

We do NOT have a society like Canada, or any of the European countries.

Kanary

[Cat Atomic]

14. Because, thanks to our two parties, alot of people feel it doesn't matter.

Bush Jr.'s administration is unusually extremist, and so there's an actual difference between the two candidates this time around.

But neither party has wanted to deal with issues that matter to the great number of Americans in recent years. Neither wants to deal with national healthcare, exported jobs, declining wages, etc. Neither has shown any desire to fight the real war: the class war. Because they're both on the same side of that fight.

Yes, there are exceptions, sure. There always are. But look at the DLC. They've defined the Democratic Party in recent years. That hardly inspires people to take time out of their oppressive schedules to vote.

[Yupster]

15. Bumper sticker I saw

"I never vote.
It just encourages them."

This attitude is exhibited by a client of mine who is 78 years old, and has never voted in his life.

When I ask him about it he makes a rasberry sound. When I tell him how important this election is, he waves his hand and then makes a rasberry sound.

He's educated, intelligent, and waves away any idea that he should vote.

[AndyTiedye]

20. I Always Vote. They At Least Have to Go to the Trouble of Stealing It

[Dorian Gray]

35. Is it bad that

your client makes me laugh? :)

Sometimes I feel the same way about our system. Which is why I voted for Nader in 2000. (In NJ, so it didn't affect the outcome of the election.) I was sick of the two party system, and felt that we needed a better representative, even if I didn't agree with his politics 100%.

There is no chance of that happening this time. (Oh, sure, I would still love a viable third party candidate, but this is not the election in which I am going to stand on my high horse!)

[msmcghee]

16. We are emotional animals.

People vote for ideology or emotion - not for logic or reason or to make good government work. Well, some do that but not very many. Very few conservatives do that - more liberals do that because we believe good government is a process. Voting supports the process.

That's why when people are rational and not emotional about government - liberals win. The repukes figured this out before we did. I think the DNC still doesn't get it. Gingrich had it down - Rove knows it backwards and forwards and inside out. George Lakoff is on the right track.

We are emotional animals. Most people are only interested enough to vote to either impose their own world-view (ideology) on others - or to defend their own world-view from being trashed by the opposite side.

Liberal vs. conservative are the two classic views. They represent the aggressive/peaceful, male/female, competitive/altruistic, yin/yang dichotomy of all human cultures.

The repukes have raised the partisan emotional content of politics to a generational high. By telling people who are psychologically conservative that it's OK, even good, to hate liberals - they've led many poor and minorities to vote against their interests and have given their side the opportunity to impose their world-view on us and have forced us to defend our world-view or capitulate.

When politics is emotional and not rational conservatives tend to win. But this time they've gotten many of us pissed off enough that we too have become very emotional. This will be a record turnout - thanks to the repuke's efforts over the last 30 years to make politics hot, emotionally.

[2Design]

17. I know three people who are not voting -

one is not registered and says it will not matter - they are both skull and bones and kerry isn't going to do much different in iraq than Bush
This guy can't stand bush but isn't willing to be ABB. I told this guy months ago - if you don't vote you can't complain

2nd says kerry isn't different than bush and kind of backs bush - no matter what I said - He said he was planning on not voting

3rd - is a libertarian - and things the government is wrong in so many ways

I have tried with two of these people for a while


I vote because I know it is a right that if I don't exercise it I have no right to complain

I am not happy with the choices we get year after year - but it now takes way too much money to do these things and anyone who is pure enough to get pass the press - isn't necessarily a good person

we need to shorten our election period to 6 weeks and stop spending all this money on junk and ads and instead use it for causes that help ALL people

[bvar22]

18. Our system discourages active participation.

If we were able to change to a system of proportional representation, or even instant runoff, you would see more voter participation. Choosing between the lesser of two evils doesn't inspire people to go to the polls.

Many Americans believe that the elections are rigged, and to a certain extent, they are right. The (inherently corrupt) two party system prevents many Americans from voting for the man or party who best represents their conscience and beliefs. Their righteous fear is that voting their conscience will split the vote and allow the worst candidate to win as happened in 2000. We are left with the least offensive vanilla candidates (rich white men) who won't alienate the muddled middle. I'm sick of our system.

Vote for ALL DEMOCRATS, its important!
Convince a lazy Democrat to vote!
Keep a republican home on election day!

[Zero Division]

19. Because so many Americans have been discouraged from participating

in politics. They've been hammered relentlessly by ideas, like "All of politics is corrupt, therefore your vote means nothing" or "All politicians are alike; they're all liars". Many Americans latch onto these ideas for a variety of reasons. Some use these ideas as an excuse to remain ignorant of political issues because they have an aversion to personal conflict. Others are embarrassed by their ignorance of political issues and use it these ideas as an excuse for refusing to explore political issues. A third reason may be that some are disgusted by the fact that no one popular political party or ideology fits their strongly held beliefs (populist social conservatives, for example). I'm certain there are many other reasons for clinging to these ideas, as well.

Unpopular ideologies from the far right, far left and odd combinations in-between often claim that it is from this set of Americans that they will produce a political revolution for their respective ideologies.

Other important factors include the fact that many Americans cannot see the connection between their lives or the lives of the people they care about and politics, and many Americans also seem to believe that politicians and political actions are ineffective unless they have a near perfect fit with their ideals.

[roguevalley]

21. its compulsory in some countries. I hear it is in Australia. It should be

here too.

[Djinn]

40. technically VOTING isn't compulsory

turning up at the booth on election day (a very small % of people would live more than walking distance away from their nearest booth) there is absolutely no compulsion to actually vote, but most people figure "well I'm here already"

IN Australia we also have a basically two party system, the two parties are near identical and serve big biz rather than constituents but even when I don't see the point (I also live in a dead safe ALP seat so it's kinda pointless voting) I still voet - people died for the priviledge and still do throughout the world.

How does it infringe on someones "liberty" to ask them to mark a box once every four years - in a society you have responsibilities as well as rights, voting is one of them

[Lydia Leftcoast]

22. Thanks to our trivializing news media

most people don't understand that it's the local elections that really determine the quality of our everyday lives. Judging from the local media, you might not know that local governments exist, unless one of the officials is involved in a scandal or says something outrageous.

Most people just wake up in late October every four years and pick a president based on some vague feeling of "likability."

[jdj]

24. I think it is way too much emphasis on pop culture.

And sex sex sex.

Dont' bother me with politics, this commercial for sneakers is making me horny.

And the caste system in this country.

And the mind-control of the country by media through pop culture.

lather, rinse, repeat.

[Must_B_Free]

23. Uh, Excuse me, but we're free NOT to vote.

some people are working on other things

[951]

25. My aunt says 'God' doesnt want her to

she would probably vote republican so... :headbang:

[jdj]

26. Jesus, you'd think if God really talked to her he'd say something

alot more profound than "don't vote".

[ckdexter]

27. The electoral college is part of the problem

People who aren't in battleground states believe, with good reason, that their vote doesn't count.

I think the electoral college is in part responsible for the (false) sentiment that there's no difference between the parties, so why bother voting. There often aren't enough differences between candidates because both parties pander to the moderates, since it's moderates in both parties that dominate in each state. Those who'd support real change are too spread out across the country to influence the direction of the parties, and that's the reason for their near convergence.

[Rockholm]

28. I was in Montreal too this weekend!

[NightTrain]

36. You weren't at the Rockabilly Jam, by any chance?

Hey, you never know...!

[Rockholm]

42. Nope, just hanging out, shopping, eating, etc.

[blm]

29. I thought Netherlands was the most free.

.

[MadHound]

30. Well, thanks to the two party/same corporate master system of gov't

Voting, for the most part, has become an exercise in futility.

The process, even around here, is recognized as not voting FOR somebody, but instead, voting AGAINST somebody else. "Voting for the lesser of two evils", how many times have we all felt that way? How about "holding my nose and pulling the lever"? Many people have simply decided to do away with the charade and opted out of voting altogether, and in many ways, I can't blame them. All we are deciding anymore is how fast we approach the cliff edge, not whether we're going to change direction before we get there.

[drdigi420]

31. The US isn't free or very smart

How else do you explain the proliferation of Reality TV, Religion, Country "music", and SUVs?

[Bo]

33. Laziness

[cheshire]

34. Warm sh*t, feels good even though it sticks. Apathy.

[Q]

38. No country can be 'free'...

...without a press unfettered by government. Democracy/freedom can't survive without a free press to inform citizens about their government. Thus, America is no longer free.

[JVS]

39. It's a free country. If you don't want to vote, you don't have to.

[sphincter]

41. Well...

I have been questioning the whole "Land of the free" mantra since a mate of mine had to pay a 10,000 USD fine to the US Treasury Dept. for spending 2 weeks vacationing in Cuba.
I mean, it is OK for a gov't to impose restrictions on their citizens, since that is what governements do, but doing it at the same time as emphasising the word "freedom" is a little bit hypocritical.