Is it okay to be apolitical in a democracy?

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
32,012
T'Republic of Yorkshire
#11
If you intend to vote, you should have some in-depth knowledge of the issues on which you are voting, rather than believing what the politicians tell you.
 
Likes: Ichon
Jan 2010
4,356
Atlanta, Georgia USA
#12
> How essential is for an individual to be knowledgeable in depth, in about ongoing politics?

> Is it fundamentally wrong to be apolitical?

> If you feel all the competing parties/fronts are worthless, is it right not to vote?

> Should the political awareness/ indulgence of an Individual be left for them to decide (Whether he/she should be apolitical or not) or is there more to it than just personal choice?
Not really.

No.

It’s not right, but it’s not wrong. One may vote or not vote as he or she pleases.

Yes—it’s a personal choice and shouls be respected
 

stevev

Ad Honorem
Apr 2017
2,862
Las Vegas, NV USA
#13
Being apolitical to me means not blindly loyal to a particular party, but voting for the best candidate. The primary system in California can yield two candidates from the same party in the general election.
 

Port

Ad Honorem
Feb 2013
2,061
portland maine
#14
I believe it is important, being knowledgeable slightly above the usual and knowing more than just what you're spoon-fed in form of ads and posters can change a lot and help you to make a better, more concrete and confident judgement.


Campaign ads and promises are almost always lies, In my country and I believe in many others politicians show ads and promises for campaigns yet when they get elected they 9 times out of 10 go back on their promises, disregard all responsibilities, both moral and lawful and do everything to enrich themselves at the expense of the state and the people.

People see these ads and believe them, electing politicians like these. Being more knowledgeable can either prevent this or reduce the chances of it happening. With the mentality of ''just look at ads and vote'' anyone with money,no matter how incompetent and irresponsible they may be can become elected, with extensive knowledge people can determine what is right and wrong with candidates better and make better votes.

Nowadays people just elect someone with more promises, adverts or a fancy personality more so than someone who is genuinely competent. Common sense does not seem to be so ''common'' among the people as a mass.



No, and I don't understand why do you suggest it is. It is sometimes seen as ignorant or weak when someone does not vote in certain cases but I found this to be extremely rare and for me it's perfectly fine if someone doesn't have an opinion or simply does not care about politics. This comes with ''don't vote, don't complain'' mentioned above.



I think it is right not to vote. However sometimes choosing the '' least bad'' option might be preferable, a tactic politicians might use is to convince the people that all candidates are worthless so they don't vote, as such they potentially reduce their number of votes but also reduce competition as other candidates won't get votes either.




I believe that it is up to someone to decide if they personally care about politics or not, but in some cases like the aforementioned ''least bad'' case it might be beneficial for them to vote regardless of opinion.
If they decide to be political it is only natural that they should read up and understand politics and politicians they can vote for.

I see it this way: A truly political person is someone who truly understands politics and follows them and maybe even engages in them, someone who just looks at ads and watches the news is not truly political as they don't actually understand politics in depth in most cases. An equivalent to this would be to call someone who reads 1 book and watches 1 documentary without any research or concrete understanding of history a historian.
I
have not voted in decades. I keep myself informed, and am involved in my community, Portland Me. However I made a decision to not vote for the lesser of 2 evils and that seems to be the only options presented at the national level in my opinion.
 
Jun 2016
1,747
England, 200 yards from Wales
#16
If you intend to vote, you should have some in-depth knowledge of the issues on which you are voting, rather than believing what the politicians tell you.
Agreed, if you want to enjoy the right to vote there should be the responsibility to be, to a certain minimum extent, informed about the issues at hand. Otherwise you are inflicting a decision based on ignorance on everybody (and in what other area of life is it considered a good thing to decide something without a reasonable degree of information?)
Of course being truly apolitical, ie not voting as well as not following what's going on, is a personal choice.
 

Asherman

Forum Staff
May 2013
3,190
Albuquerque, NM
#17
Q.1. How essential is for an individual to be knowledgeable in depth, in about ongoing politics?
A.1.
It depends largely on how the terms “essential”, and “knowledgeable” are taken. Since American Partisan Politics is not done here, we have to define “ongoing politics” as a more generic term in the modern world. Unfortunately in that world, opinions and political control are in the hands of a few and those hands don’t generally care much what the individual knows, thinks, or believes … so long as the individual conforms to the leader’s direction. The most tyrannical and despotic rulers claim to hold the highest and most enlightened views. Western style Democracies are not fundamentally egalitarian, and fashion has led to greater centralization, a shift in community values from rugged individual independence, toward entitlements and universal escape from any form of suffering. In these sorts of communities, how can we blame leaders for adopting policies and laws to give us what our actions clearly desire and in spite of what we say we want. How many of us spend the time to be even marginally knowledgeable about our own little worlds?

Each individual has to decide for themselves, even if they are the most abject slave, what values to put on their meager store of liberty and choice. Some will be rational, and others will not. That’s just human beings.

I believe the essentials individuals should strive for is:

* Develop to the greatest extent possible our individual potential; learning to think is key. Not all are equal in mental capacity, but few even scratch the surface of their own capability to think.

* Making good choices is what the Thinking Tool helps us to do. Choose for yourself, after all it is individual choices that are the foundation of liberty. Be skeptical, but realistic in making judgements as to what to believe.

* “All politics are Local”, or so they say. Political Parties tend to organize around just a few basic ideas, but all of them what to dominate all others. When Political and Religious Idealists are left to their own devices, they will subjugate everyone else, or die trying. Be careful of becoming the slave of Idealism. That’s tough to do since we humans are “herd animals” that generally are uncomfortable at bucking the opinions of our friends and Society at large.


O.2. Is it fundamentally wrong to be apolitical?
A.2.
Again, it depends a lot on what you mean? If you mean “apolitical” to mean being “open-minded”, then I suppose I agree. If you mean is it wrong for a person to be ignorant of the world around them and the political currents that will directly affect their lives, then nope. I think people need to be situationally aware, but skeptical of claims by those who live to advance their idea of what the whole world should think, say and do.


O.3. If you feel all the competing parties/fronts are worthless, is it right not to vote?
A.3.
How did you arrive at that “feeling” that all political efforts are worthless? Did ye arrive at that on your own, or is it a reflection of your emotional perceptions of reality? History seems to pretty clearly show that political movements do sometimes rise and fall as public trends change. Better to vote with a ballot than a bullet. In large mass societies/cultures, the individual seems reduced to in significance, but in reality the Laws of Big Numbers take over and the individual choices add up to those conditions most believed in by the whole.


Q.4. Should the political awareness/ indulgence of an Individual be left for them to decide (Whether he/she should be apolitical or not) or is there more to it than just personal choice?
A.4.
If not, then the individual is no longer free. What is more personal for a free person than to decide for themselves what to believe in, or how to reconcile those most personal values (even though they are hardly our own).
 

specul8

Ad Honorem
Oct 2016
2,819
Australia
#18
> How essential is for an individual to be knowledgeable in depth, in about ongoing politics?
Not essential IMO ..... for the immediate individual future. Fairly essential for a good representational vote , yet a lot of that can be canceled out by suspect arrangements and groupings of the voters ( eg, 'gerrymander' ) . Then again, since democracy doesnt really work anyway , maybe its not so good to have all those people deciding . But then again , again, the most ignorant are likely to want to express their opionion and want to vote .

The person that is very knowledgeable about politics might decide not to vote anyway, realizing its relative uselessness . Especially in places where voting was demonstrated to be unrelated to results !

> Is it fundamentally wrong to be apolitical?
No . There are large communities around the world that work on a democratic voting and electing process that are apolitical .

" We can’t speak a word of politics ... We can’t assign blame, take side, further designs, or identify ourselves with any system prejudicial to the best interests of the world ... We can’t either side with or denounce any political figures ... We can’t express support or opposition for a candidate during an election ...We can’t be drawn into what might become divisive debates on governmental policies ... We can’t associate with the political pursuits of our countries, with the politics of their governments and the schemes and programs of parties and factions ... We can’t actively support an individual who has announced his candidacy for political office ... We can’t express support for one political candidate over another ... We can’t provide written and oral endorsements, praise or criticize a candidate or post a candidate’s photo on a social media site ... We can’t seek political power; accept governmental political posts; affiliate themselves with political parties; become entangled in partisan issues, or participate in programmes tied to the divisive agendas of any group or faction ... We can’t allow ourselves to become the tools of unscrupulous politicians: ... We can’t be party to any instigation to overthrow a government or interfere in political relations between the governments of different nations ... "

Bahá’í Involvement in Politics

> If you feel all the competing parties/fronts are worthless, is it right not to vote?
"Right" ? ... depends on the law. Here it is illegal not to vote . Should it be that way ? Well you can do a donk if you like ;

Donkey vote - Wikipedia

But they might be expecting that and arrange the ballot accordingly . Ah hell .... just draw a big dick on the ballot paper :D

- actually, I am wondering how many ballots they get like that ... I know some people, being completely frustrated have written obscenities on the ballot , only, no vote. Probably doesnt do much good except give a momentary feeling of satisfaction .
> Should the political awareness/ indulgence of an Individual be left for them to decide (Whether he/she should be apolitical or not) or is there more to it than just personal choice?
I am mostly a libertarian so I suppose it should be left to the individual . But overall, its a bit like the legal system ; the type of system REALLY sucks ... but we cant think up a better way of doing it . Unless we count the 'best' system ; benevolent dictatorship ... but that's a gamble !
 

Belgarion

Ad Honorem
Jul 2011
6,603
Australia
#19
Is there not a saying that goes something like: 'You may not be interested in politics, but politcs is certainly interested in you'. I think it essential that everyone take some interest in politics. Not to do so will allow the true fanatics to control the system.
 

Similar History Discussions