That sounds interesting! Both of these arguments are valid! When someone manages to win in a low turn-out we have to blame the people who did not turn up to cast their votes!
The non voters- good or bad- are not relevant in elections. Non voting may represent either lethargy and negligence or a deliberate attempt to show contempt for parliamentary system and democracy.
The rulers- good or bad are elected by voters and not non voters. It is said that people get the government they deserve. Bad people will not elect or get a good government. Most of our people are ridden by narrow caste and community consdiderations. Most people are greedy and corrupt as dowry crimes depict. We cannot expect such people to elect good government. But there is no option. It is a matter of peoples' wisdom and decision. They will get the government they deserve- neither better nor worse.
I do not agree that non voters are good people and they are decisive. In fact, the non voters are no better. At best, they are lethargic and would not elect a peforming government. The non voters are also a small minority. Let us ignore them as they do not deserve any appreciation.
G. K. Ajmani Tax consultant http://gkajmani-mystraythoughts.blogspot.com/
I also believe those who do not exercise their franchises as a mark of protest are serving none! It's completely a negative mindset which encourages this kind of negative conduct.
