John Singleton with Bob HowardRip Van Australia (Stanmore: Cassell Australia, 1977), pp. 263-64, under the heading “Voting”.

It is, perhaps, the ultimate contradiction for a supposedly free and democratic society to be founded on a system of compulsory voting. Compulsory voting is a blatant violation of an individual’s right to freedom, voluntary action and free choice, and as such is totally immoral. It should be repealed immediately.

As has already been mentioned elsewhere, voting only assumes the importance it has today when governments possess the power they currently hold. Strip governments of that power, and remove it from their grasp by constitutional change, and it won’t particularly matter who votes, or who is elected. In this regard, arguments over the merits of various types of voting, or over allocation of electoral boundaries in order to achieve a more efficient voting system so as to make for more efficient government, entirely miss the essential point. They are arguments over details which concede erroneous fundamental principles. What’s the point of arguing over whether or not the government performs certain operations efficiently or not, when it can be shown that they really have no right to be performing them at all?

As has been discussed under Democracy, voting today is the means whereby one group of voters help themselves to the property of another. It is the means of pressuring governments into handing out privileges, and determining which privileges are handed out by which government to which group. It represents a total perversion of the original idea of government.

Two interesting ideas that are being promoted in the U.S.A. (where voting is not compulsory) are the inclusion on voting ballot papers of the alternatives “none of the above” and “I vote to abolish this office”. This, at least, allows voters to register a positive vote of discontent.

It is significant that in the most recent United States presidential election, which was a very important and close contest, almost half of the eligible voters did not bother to cast a vote. That is both an indictment of the modern United States government and a reflection on the lousy choices offered to voters at election time. It also makes a mockery of the “democratic” process. (It is no solution, however, to compound the problem by advocating compulsory voting.) The answer, as stated above, is to reduce the power of government, so the low voting figure doesn’t matter because politicians don’t matter.

While Australians are forced to vote, it would help if more people at least learned how to vote effectively, by using their preferential vote. This system gives the voter, in effect, more than one vote. It allows the voter to vote, first for a minority candidate, and second for the major Party of his/her choice. If the minority candidate doesn’t win and is eliminated, as preferences are allocated, the vote passes on as a full vote to the major Party candidate. Less than 10 per cent of the Australian electorate understand this. This allows people to support minority candidates without prejudicing the chances of their favourite majority Party’s victory.

In view of the increasing incompetent sameness of our major Parties, use of the preference system would give voters a real chance of promoting a genuine alternative. Or at least letting leaders of both major political groups know we really don’t want either of them.