Not giving your vote simply means you are voting with the majority

Not giving your vote simply means you are voting with the majority whatever they decide.


With lot of things and rights that democracy gives us, it takes away a very big right: that is the right of not participating. At least all the various form of democratic society that we have, none have preserved this right.


So what do you do? Not registered to vote? Not going to poll?


And you thought that you did not participate? With all due respect, I don’t understand how a bunch of engineer can make such a profound logical mistake. Please think again, you will see it. It’s a no brainer.


By not exercising your right to vote, you have already cast your vote. You cast your vote for majority decision in advance. You are saying that I trust all the people who do give vote. That’s all.


There is no option for not giving your vote. Your options are as follows:


1) Vote YES on propX
2) Vote NO on propX
3) Vote with majority decision (you don’t have to vote, just relax and watch CNN)



Same goes for president candidates:
1) Mr X
2) Mr Y
3) Mr Z
4) Majority decision (you don’t have to vote, just relax and watch CNN)


If there were a democratic election that required 50+% of possible voters (not only the actual voters) to be elected, then and only then not voting means not participation. For all other case, you have already casted your vote to go with majority decision by default. Now all you can do is to change that vote the way you want (if you want).


Thanks,
Babu

[Okay, so looks like few countries are experimenting with idea of a "NO vote". For example, Bangladesh's December 2008 parliament election may have an option of "NO vote" in the ballot. If number of NO vote is greater than 50% of total given vote, election result will be rejected and a new election will be held. This will give you an opportunity to "participate" in a negative way. Then again, it will take you to square one where you face another election, so not much success there.]