As 2012 comes to a close...

[hanasian]

I have returned to Live Journal. I see on my calendar that I opened this account nearly 9 years ago in 2004 after having to close my Halasian account. I also have not posted an entry on here for the whole year of 2011. Guess I've been full-on into the facebook for a few years now, and quite frankly have reached a 'burn-out' stage with that. When I

Comments

[alqualisse]

For some reason, I recall British ex-pats residing in Australia (we have loads of them) all filling out their postal votes for British elections. I don't know which one - and by that I mean I don't know if they were national, state or local elections. Perhaps having a 3 tier government system is a purely Australian curse and Britain doesn't have it.

I think the US is a "republic" model...meaning once you're in the club, you get a say about the club rules if you want to. Australia has a law that says it is illegal for a citizen to not vote (an enterprising soul in South Australia is challenging the constitutional validity of that dumb-ass law). All the lazy slobs who can't be assed critically appraising the national interests of policy platforms would be similarly disinclined to get off their asses to vote. Abolishing the law would be quality control on the democratic feedback.

I digress... I think because of those reasons, the two countries named allow their citizens to vote. A good idea, methinks, as we have an increasingly globalised world. Residency is not the same as loyalty to a nation. Plenty of ex-pats living here could not care less about Australian laws, values, policy etc. No way I'd want them voting. Ghastly! Those allowed to vote currently are bad enough....

I'm pretty sure I saw a news story on a slow news day following British ex-pats who had voted here via a postal vote system. Lots of other nations do it too. Mainly European ones.

I can see why the residency requirement has gotten those Scottish people living outside of Scotland hot under the collar. Not everyone can follow their studies or their career within their nation. In point of fact, it's good for the nation to have those that venture out along with those that venture in. No nation is an island - not even North Korea.

Sweetpea is a loyal American. He left to follow his heart, but he did not repudiate the American values or culture. He has sworn allegiance to America. In this Information Age, and with his family and friends in America, it's highly unlikely that he cannot grasp the significance of various propositions or candidates put to the vote simply because his postal address is not within an American domain.

And we're not American. Not yet. No, not by a long way.

He's learnt a lot about his citizenship. He's reached a point where he can contemplate allegiance to two nations. It's not an either/or thing. That's a concept many Americans, and fewer Australians, struggle with. They see nationality along the same lines of monogamy. To accept one is to renounce or even betray the other.

Given that it is Australia we are talking about, rather than North Korea, Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan....that sort of black and white rigidity indicates to me a relatively underdeveloped grasp of national identity concepts.

I think it will take thousands of years, if ever, to abandon this concept of nations. But I can see the seeds of it now. Did we ever think we would be so globalised?

[heliona]

We have a tiered system. I know a Frenchman who lives here and who is married to an English lady isn't allowed to vote in the central government election, but could vote in the local council elections. So it's quite complicated. You can vote by proxy (and post) but I suspect there will be rules as to which elections you can vote in.

I think one of the things that confused me about the US (which has subsequently changed) was the inability to have dual nationality. The fact that an American living outside of the US for whatever reason and who wanted to become a citizen of that country had to denounce their American citizenship I found a strange concept. But they've changed that now, which makes sense to me. Because as you say, just because you don't live in your home country doesn't mean you're not loyal to it or want to remain a citizen of it. (I find the allegiance to the flag thing rather weird, though.)

And whilst residency might not mean loyalty to that nation, it does mean that you're directly affected by laws that are made by a government you're living under. Then again, I suppose if you care that much, then you could take out citizenship and then have the ability to vote. Particularly since the US now allows dual citizenship. (I certainly didn't mean to imply that not living in a country meant that you wouldn't know what those laws and propositions meant to that country, merely that they wouldn't directly affect you if you weren't living there.)

Speaking about the law that means it's illegal to not vote, I often think it'd be a good idea to introduce something similar to that here. We have such a low turn-out voting-wise, and even the people that do vote don't necessarily do any research. And of course, all the people that don't vote, then complain about the results, which is very irritating! I guess there's no real answer to the voting turn-out problem.

I'm not sure we will ever abandon the concept of nations. I think it's in human nature to have cliques/groups. We're globalised, but we're also still fighting amongst ourselves. A prime example is Britain's current stance in the EU. (They want to get out because it's not going their way.)

My background means that I'm slightly unique in that I don't really have any "allegiance" to any country, Britain or otherwise. My cultural background is mostly British, naturally, as my parents are British, but it's influenced by all the other countries I've visited as a child. So I view things from an odd point of view. :D