I'm back, Jack!
Why is it that people who couldn't care less about voting in a country where they can make a difference, are so politically involved in one where they can't?
That's the thought that came to my mind when I saw a lot of people around me encouraging people to vote for the US election today. Now, let me clarify that I am not saying that these people didn't vote in their native countries. I, personally have not voted in my native country. It was just a greater question in my mind.
Why is it that people who may not vote in India, will be politically involved in the US? I don't know if I have the answers, but I do have some thoughts on it.
Every politician is a scoundrel. (Yes, I am a cynic)It is a lot easier, however, to be swayed by a scoundrel wearing a business suit & talking in a language you understand about issues which you are familiar with, rather than a candidate who wears a "loincloth" and screams in an uncouth manner in a language you may not be familiar with about issues you don't care about. Sure, charisma palys a huge part, but it stems from what I said above.
There is, however, a bigger question at hand. The question pertains to the participation in the political process of a country where one does not have the right to vote. Is this correct?
Let us consider this - if a large enough immigrant community comes into a country (legally) to seek a living (e.g. - on a work visa) & then participates and influences the political process in that country. Potentially, this has an impact on the fundamental right to choose, of the bonafide citizens of that country. The question is a simple one - act towards others the way you would want them to act towards you. If you are legally in a nation where you do not have a right to vote, you are essentially a guest there. If you attempt to influence the political process there, aren't you essentially overstepping your limits? That is why I disagree with the right of people who cannot vote in a country to attempt to influence the political process there.
Edited to add :
Never finished this blog in the first shot (that's what I get for blogging while watching TV). I just wanted to add - By the same token that a non-citizen should never attempt to influence the political process of a country, once you are a citizen of any country, you should have all the rights, unquestioned, of a "natural" citizen. This includes the right to being Prime Minister/President, whether or not you were born in that country.
Secondly, if you work and pay taxes in any country, but are not a citizen, you should not have the right to directly influence the political process (e.g. - by taking out protest marches/delegations to meet government executives). You should only be able to indirectly make your stand felt. (Through your employer if you are working somewhere, or through your embassy etc. in other cases)
That's the thought that came to my mind when I saw a lot of people around me encouraging people to vote for the US election today. Now, let me clarify that I am not saying that these people didn't vote in their native countries. I, personally have not voted in my native country. It was just a greater question in my mind.
Why is it that people who may not vote in India, will be politically involved in the US? I don't know if I have the answers, but I do have some thoughts on it.
Every politician is a scoundrel. (Yes, I am a cynic)It is a lot easier, however, to be swayed by a scoundrel wearing a business suit & talking in a language you understand about issues which you are familiar with, rather than a candidate who wears a "loincloth" and screams in an uncouth manner in a language you may not be familiar with about issues you don't care about. Sure, charisma palys a huge part, but it stems from what I said above.
There is, however, a bigger question at hand. The question pertains to the participation in the political process of a country where one does not have the right to vote. Is this correct?
Let us consider this - if a large enough immigrant community comes into a country (legally) to seek a living (e.g. - on a work visa) & then participates and influences the political process in that country. Potentially, this has an impact on the fundamental right to choose, of the bonafide citizens of that country. The question is a simple one - act towards others the way you would want them to act towards you. If you are legally in a nation where you do not have a right to vote, you are essentially a guest there. If you attempt to influence the political process there, aren't you essentially overstepping your limits? That is why I disagree with the right of people who cannot vote in a country to attempt to influence the political process there.
Edited to add :
Never finished this blog in the first shot (that's what I get for blogging while watching TV). I just wanted to add - By the same token that a non-citizen should never attempt to influence the political process of a country, once you are a citizen of any country, you should have all the rights, unquestioned, of a "natural" citizen. This includes the right to being Prime Minister/President, whether or not you were born in that country.
Secondly, if you work and pay taxes in any country, but are not a citizen, you should not have the right to directly influence the political process (e.g. - by taking out protest marches/delegations to meet government executives). You should only be able to indirectly make your stand felt. (Through your employer if you are working somewhere, or through your embassy etc. in other cases)
posted by Firebringer at 10:30 PM
6 comments
