Should Democracy Be Compulsory?
In response to a slow news week, certain highbrow newspapers have stirred up the debate over voluntary vs compulsory voting.
"Compulsory voting makes about as much sense as having the death penalty for attempted suicide," says civil rights activist Sophie Deny. "You can't
force people to be free! You can only give them the choice. Besides, if all those derelicts who can't be bothered to get off their butts once every
few years voted, who would they elect? I shudder to think."
"It's not contradictory at all," argues political commentator William Silk. "The fact is, if not everyone votes, the outcome isn't truly
representative. Some groups--like elderly gun nuts--vote more often than others. That's why we always end up with such terrible politicians."
"This raises an interesting issue," says Sean Usman, your advisor. "And that is: why do we need elections, anyway? Seems to me it would be much
simpler if you just decided what was right, and did it. Wouldn't that save everyone a lot of time?"
Nudists Demand Time In Sun
A loose coalition of sartorially-challenged individuals known as "Let It All Hang Out" has called on the government to relax public nudity laws.
"For too long, our bodies have been trapped in these prisons of cotton and polyester!" yells protester Efthamia Han, while apparently developing a
nasty case of sunburn. "We must repeal the puritanical laws that make public nudity a crime. My body--my choice to dangle!"
"I agree," muses sociology professor Bruce Dovey. "But I don't think the protestors are going far enough. Public nudity shouldn't be an option: it
should be compulsory. Nudity is highly liberating. And it would put that disgusting "Hooters" out of business once and for all."
"Whoa, whoa," says noted accountant Ethel Summers. "Are these people serious? The last thing I want to see when I'm out for a coffee is some
lumbering, over-weight nudist coming down the sidewalk toward me. If people want to get naked, they can do it in the privacy of their own homes. Think
of the children!"
Police Consider "Big Brother" Anti-Crime System
The Police department is considering installing surveillance cameras in all major public areas, in an effort to crack down on crime.
"This is a blatant invasion of the right to privacy!" says libertarian web site operator Chris Dubois. "Now I can't even go out in public any more
without being watched? And you know this is just the beginning. Today there are cameras in city streets. Tomorrow they're peering through your bedroom
"Hey, I've got news for you," says Police media liaison Randy Deny. "When you're out in public, PEOPLE CAN SEE YOU. These cameras will be extremely
helpful in reducing the national crime rate. Frankly, I can't see what the fuss is about."
"This 'slippery slope' argument has got me thinking," says Police Minister Sarah Silk. "You know, it would be a lot easier to fight crime if we
watched people all the time. Not with cameras, of course. That's clearly an invasion of privacy. But how about a national database of our citizens,
coupled with compulsory ID cards and barcoding? It would stop crime dead in its tracks."
Military Demands Increased Spending
The Department of Defense has put its case for a substantial increase in funding for the coming financial year.
"These are turbulent times we live in," says Defense Chief Anne-Marie Strange. "Turbulent and dangerous. And the only sensible response to that, of
course, is to build a lot more weapons. Unless we get the funding we need, I can't promise that we'll be able to defend A Top Secret Nation's
sovereign borders from rogue nations and foreign powers. Or those leaky boatloads of refugees, for that matter."
"NO MORE BOMBS," chant the protestors outside Parliament House, in a repetitious and increasingly annoying appeal. Spokesperson Billy McGuffin,
speaking through a feedback-afflicted microphone, says, "A Top Secret Nation needs fewer weapons, not more! Make the world a safer place! Disarm
edit on 7-6-2014 by Gear because: layout