Today I Learned (TIL)

6545 readers

3 users here now

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?

/c/til is a community for any true knowledge that you would like to share, regardless of topic or of source.

Share your knowledge and experience!

Rules

Information must be true
Follow site rules
No, you don't have to have literally learned the fact today
Posts must be about something you learned

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

TIL that in 1968, Liechtenstein held a referendum on women's suffrage where both men and women were allowed to vote. Despite this, the No-side won with 56.3% of the total and 49.5% of the women vote (en.wikipedia.org)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Women's suffrage would not be introduced in Liechtenstein until 1984.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I believe the Liechtensteinian constitution only guarantees a secret ballot in parliamentary elections. It's not guaranteed that this vote also had a secret ballot (although it probably did).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn't need to be constitutional, a simple law is enough.

Sure, if this was some kind of joke poll ignoring the most basic rules of democratic voting, I'll stand corrected.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean of course it doesn't need to be a constitutional law, that was just the most basic of Liechtensteinian law I could quickly find (and many countries have it there, e.g. France). But it's unwise to assume that the secret ballot is such a given in a voting process. Nigeria has open ballots iirc, and even the US does not technically have a system that guarantees a proper secret ballot (as mail-in votes technically don't meet the criteria).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nigeria

It's not a democratic process then by definition.

mail-in votes technically don't meet the criteria

Now that's a valid point. But how bold to assume, the vote was lost because men forced their women to use mail-in. In reality, reasons are much more complex.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not a democratic process then by definition.

Secret ballot is not a prerequisite for a democratic process. The UK has numbered ballots allowing courts to, in exceptional circumstances, order the reveal of what someone has voted (violating the secret ballot). But we don't claim their voting process is undemocratic.

But how bold to assume, the vote was lost because men forced their women to use mail-in.

I never assumed this. I'm merely pointing out that the secret ballot is not an automatic given in a democratic election.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Secret ballot is not a prerequisite for a democratic process.

What? Of course it is. Hence: "The secret ballot became commonplace for individual citizens in liberal democracies worldwide by the late 20th century.".

The UK has numbered ballots

secret != anonymous ... OPs argument mainly dismissed confidentiality.

But we don't claim their voting process is undemocratic.

we certainly would if no one checked the number of people simultaniously using a voting booth.

I never assumed this.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that. I meant OPs argument.