Secret ballots (The nature of anarchism etc.)

[John Thornton]

At 03:27 PM 10/2/02 +0000, you wrote:
>>Justin Schwartz wrote:
>>
>> >>For instance, the US already has constitutional guarantees of freedom 
>> of political speech. But you still find it necessary to have secret 
>> voting. Why is that?
>> >
>> >No, we do not find it necessary. It's a right, not a requirement.
>>
>>A RIGHT! You say it is a RIGHT to cower behind a curtain like a rabbit, 
>>furtively casting your ballot in secret!!!! A RIGHT to hide your opinions 
>>from the prying eyes of employers and neighbours!!!
>
>I would fight to the death a proposal to have a nonsecret ballot, not 
>mainly because people would be subject to retaliation--in a modern 
>society, your boss usually has better things to do do than to find out how 
>his employees (in different areas of town) voted--but because people 
>shouldn't have to justify their deepest convictions if they don't want to.
>
>jks

What experience makes you think your boss would have better things to do? 
My only experience with a semi non-secret ballot was during my time in the 
military. My Lt. was aware that the C.O. wanted Bush to win. Everyone in my 
outfit; others I knew stationed elsewhere told of similar experiences, were 
given the mandatory speech about how our vote was ours own to cast but then 
were told apocryphal stories of individuals who voted against the C.O.'s 
wishes and were given dangerous assignments or denied promotion. These 
threats were taken seriously and after you voted on base you were 
immediately asked who you voted for. With no evidence about how your vote 
was cast you had the choice between voting as requested or voting in 
opposition and then lying about it and hope you were a convincing liar. I 
think MANY bosses would like to know how their employees voted and use it 
to deny promotion or assign dangerous and/or distasteful jobs.

John Thornton