'No Vote' or 'None of the Above'?

Hi, There is not too much of a difference between "No vote" and "None of the above". The former is usually a short form for the latter. The no vote does not mean not going to vote, or boycotting the vote. I am opposed to this idea, unless proven otherwise.

1. This is an elitist idea. People who can't get elected in the democratic way, are seeking a legal response to a political issue.
2. This is also a futile attempt to depoliticise democratic politics and delegitimise political parties. Democracy cannot survive without electoral politics.
3. If we dont like the candidates in our constituency, then we should either put ourselves as candidates, or join a party and persuade the party to put up better candidates, or form a political party and try and persuade the voter by putting up better candidates. Just because we may not be in a positition to undertake any of these options, does not mean the existing democratic process should be scrapped.
4. This is not a practical idea. In the best case situation, if the No Vote, wins, what political alternative will it create, except prolong the political uncertainty. In the worst case, very few voters will exercise this choice.
5. In Bangladesh, in the parliamentary election held on Dec 29, "None of the Above", was an option on each ballot. While the election saw a national turn out of nearly 85%, far less than 1% votes were cast for the "No" option.
6. A vast Majority of people who vote, need an elected representative for various functional reasons, related to their daily struggle for survival. So when poor voters out number the rest, the 'no' option is not a practical option for the voters. This is exactly what happened in Bangladesh, where poor voters chose to ignore the "No vote".
7. All of us would like to contribute to reforming and strengthening our democratic institutions. But for this initiative to have any chance of garnering popular support, a positive and practical alternative needs to be proposed. The "No vote" is an empty and meaningless gesture, and so will not find favour among voters.
8. Democracy is not primarily about majority rule. That would be a snapshot. And a snapshot can easily be discarded, or get faded and forgotten. Democracy is a process which allows every one to renew and remake that picture of their dream. This means, much more than majority rule, democracy is about protecting the minority opinion of today, so that it may have an opportunity to peacefully persuade others and aspire to become the majority view tomorrow.
9. Lastly, the option "none of the above" already exists, since we thankfully haven't made voting compulsory. Those who legitimately choose not to vote, are in effect not voicing support for any of those on the ballot. Having that option on the ballot would not only add nothing to the democratic process, it would also imply that someone else, the political parties or the candidates, need to clean up their act, while we can sit on the sidelines. That would not be a good omen for democracy. Democracy can only thrive when the demos participates actively as citizens. Inner party democracy, financial transparency, etc., will come when we the people not only demand it from others, but participate in the political process, and make these happen.

Barun Mitra