Demarchy NEG

I Negate Resolved: In a democracy, voting ought to be compulsory.

Definitions:
Before I begin, I would like to define a few words.

Democracy: government in which the supreme power is held by the people and used by them
directly or indirectly through representation Merriam Websters

Ought: An obligation Merriam Websters Voting: a usually formal expression of opinion or will in response to a proposed decision Merriam Websters

Compulsory: mandatory jurisdiction that a state has agreed to accept in certain prescribed
matters. - Merriam Websters

Demarchy: a form of government in which the state is governed by randomly selected decision
makers who have been selected by sortation (lot) from a broadly inclusive pool of eligible citizens.

Observation 1: DEMOCRACY IS MORE THAN MAJORITY RULE

Anthony

Arblaster, NQA, DEMOCRACY, 1987, p. 73. Explains

There are therefore sound reasons for rejecting any crude equation of democracy with the unqualified principle of majority rule. The people cannot be equated with only a majority of them, nor can government by the people by equated with government by the majority, let alone the representatives of the majority. Minorities are also part of the people, and, as far as possible, their interests, views and convictions must be taken into account in the processes of policy-making and decision-taking.

I Value: Democratic Reformation, or the transition to a more democratic political regime. My Criterion is limiting corruption.

Contention 1: Election based Voting isnt efficient enough to challenge power systems
Benjamin Ginsberg, The Consequences of Consent: Elections, Citizen Control and Popular Acquiescence (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1982).

election based voting simply doesn't work very well to promote serious challenges to prevailing power systems. The basic problem is quite simple. An elected representative is not tied is any substantial way to particular policies, whatever the preferences of the electorate. Influence on the politician is greatest at the time of election. Once elected, the representative is released from popular control (recall is virtually impossible before the next election) but continues to be exposed to powerful pressure groups, especially corporations, state bureaucracies and political party power brokers. We all know examples of politicians who have 'sold out,' relinquishing their claimed ideals and breaking their solemn promises. Ironically, this is just as true for right-wingers as for leftwingers. The radical right was very disillusioned by Ronald Reagan.
At the simplest level,

Basically judge, election based voting results in unreliable politicians that do not represent their constituents when taking office, taking the power of the government away from people through greater influence of businesses, bureaucracies and political parties. Compulsion of voting strengthens this corruption especially by increasing the amount of uninformed voters resulting in more people susceptible to this corruption. This is the AFF world and with its inherent corruption it isnt democracy. Alternative: Instead of Implementing Compulsory Voting, Implement a Demarchy
John Burnheim, Is Democracy Possible? The Alternative to Electoral Politics (London: Polity Press, 19 85).

Demarchy is based on random selection of individuals to serve in decision-making groups which deal with particular functions or services, such as roads or education. Forget the state and forget bureaucracies. In a full-fledged Demarchy, all this is replaced by a network of groups whose members are randomly selected, each of which deals with a particular function in a particular area. traditionally, a state in which the people voted for their public officials was known as an oligarchy. This was because that even if not at first, then eventually the government would devolve to a small, homogenous group that had enough political power to disregard the will of the people. Today we define oligarchy as simply the rule of the few, but thats only the symptom; the Greeks understood that the disease was the delegation of political power through elections.
I was curious about Athenian democracy, and when I was poking around I was very surprised to find out that Sounds radical, I know.

An attractive feature of Demarchy is that if political leaders were replaced on a regular basis with randomly selected citizens, it would reduce institutionalized corruption, party apathy and complacency as well as a history of party led entitlement, lack of choice and variety in political ideas in platforms. It could be argued that replacing politicians in this way would solve such problems.

Judge, prefer this alternative because it is less corrupt than the AFFs compulsory voting. AFF has to solve for inherent corruption that is present in Compulsory Voting, such as bought out corrupt politicians. Through Demarchy, people are given the power in the government and decision making process of political issues without the harms in AFF world. Thus I urge a Negative Ballot.