Ok, unusual call for help. I have a revise and resubmit on an article on democracy and non-voting. In it, I point out that behind a lot of recent arguments for compulsory voting is the (often implicit) assumption that it is democratically better if more people vote. I argue that this is not obviously the case and that non-voting may actually be helpful - e.g. because it tends to be those most affected by a decision who are more likely to vote on it and there are democratic reasons to think that they ought to have more say.
At the moment, the article is simply called 'Democracy and Non-Voting.' I quite like this title actually - it's not especially clever or catchy, but short and too the point. One of the referees did ask, however, whether I might be able to come up with something a bit more engaging. Any suggestions gratefully welcomed.
"Silentium populi, vox Dei?"
ReplyDelete[That's not quite right from a theoretical point of view, as I doubt you're arguing that democracy is well-served if nobody votes, but it's funnier than what you've currently got (for certain values of 'funny').]
"(certain values of 'funny')".
ReplyDeleteYes, well, quite.
'Undemocratic votes' might work. You could have a colon and some explanation after it ('why compulsory voting is not democratic', for example).
Perhaps something like: "Forced to vote: the significance of compulsory voting."
ReplyDeleteI think you keep it as is...
ReplyDeleteWho Votes? Who Counts?: Democracy and Non-Voting
ReplyDelete