qualified no, because "democracy" can hardly be used as an absolute qualifier, regimes can be more or less democratic, but you always have to make choices that can be argued to be non democratic, even when trying your best, it's kind of like "freedom", some freedoms will limit others.
But that would still be (well, is, as i suspect a lot of "democracies" match that criteria one way or another) a serious blow to the claim to be democratic.
what do you mean with „represented“? Not being and to vote or be vote? I‘d say that this is not a democracy (there might be edge cases). If notify of this area sits in the parliament, then this is probably no problem. But I think it is not super easy to answer
e.g. Germany has 2056 cities and at the moment 734 members of our parliament. So statistically only every third city has a representative. Germany is still a democracy
I put qualified no. In the US DC and the territories have non voting members of Congress, which is awful. But even having meaningful representation in the national legislature is no guarantee of democracy. In India, Delhi is a quasi-state. It has representatives in the Parliament and its own legislature but the Central government can effectively overrule them through the Lt. Governor (appointed by the federal gov't).
Qualified (Or rather: *technically*) no; Obviously "controlling territory" is a *thorny* issue (and I assume this is aimed at places like Costa Rica), but also remember that we usually classify ancient rome and greece as democracies (at least some periods), yet both had residents that could not vote (non-landowners, women, slaves...) and many countries today have residents that aren't citizens, e.g. refugees, EU-style freedom of movement, etc. and cannot vote either.
@Alon yeah, about 1.5% if you count other territories and DC.
I think we'd be less forgiving of the policy if the 1.5% of people disenfranchised were excluded by other criteria, like Chinese-Americans or non-binary people.
, good question. Did the United States, France, and United Kingdom still qualify as democracies, between the Berlin Declaration of 5 June 1945 and establishment of West Germany on 23 May 1949 (and, in regard to Austria, the Austrian State Treaty coming into force on 27 July 1955)?
I'm also worried about the present-day USA, on account of the semi-disenfranchised citizens of Western Samoa, Northern Marianas Islands, Guam, US Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.
Also by the way,, it's claimed that one Leo Watts Honea, Jr. was born shortly after WWII on Palmyra when it was part of the U.S. Territory of Hawaii, and before Palmyra was specifically excluded from State of Hawaii in 1959. So, technically Mr. Honea (reportedly later resident in the mainland US) is probably not a US citizen, though disappointingly nobody appears to have fought this out in court.
Note: the story below is fictional, but the legal question posed is a serious hypothetical.
While attempting to sail across the Pacific I discovered I was pregnant. Eventually I ran aground on the
IMO, I think the better question for this pole would be, "Should a territory have voter representation in the controlling nation's electoral process?" Frame that first, and then apply it to any nation's democratic process. Given your poll question, many are getting tripped up with the term 'democracy' and it dilutes what *I think* you are after.
I do a lot of polls on my account at Mastodon. I get the same questions or requests multiple times, so I made this FAQ to make it easier to reply. Q: Why do you do so many polls? A: I like to think…
Hey, folks. Thanks for the feedback. I'm in rough agreement that you can't count a society as democratic if some big slice of the public cannot participate in government.
However, I agree with commenters that the nature of control matters. An island scientific station with only temporary residents, all of whom can vote in their home districts? Hard to see that as a problem. A temporary occupation of a defeated enemy while peace is negotiated? Not great, but ok.
I think we kid ourselves by thinking that some distinction between here and there, us and them, makes it ok. We can have a democracy on this side of the line no matter what's going on on the other side.
Not to get into an argument about it, but what specifically are you thinking of for the US? I can think of a few possibilities, but what do *you* have in mind?
@mpjgregoire about 4.5M people in DC, PR, Samoa, Guam, USVI, elsewhere have no representation at the federal level of government. (DC has 3 electoral votes for president, though). That's about 1.5% of the American population.
A move to bar US citizenship to American Samoans is being seen is as another blow to the territory and its people. But many people are happy with the status quo.
Democracy isn’t really a binary thing, where we say yes this is a democracy but once it crosses this line it is not, democracy is more of a continuum and different places, or the same place in different times, can be more democratic or less democratic. Certainly it is less democratic, but I think how much less democratic depends on the size of the unrepresented population relative to the whole, how long it has been going on and is expected to continue, and why it is happening.
American Samoa native-born here, race Samoan, long time US resident now back on island. Commented on the status of American Samoa recently, please read below if interested.
We pay federal taxes & actively recruited to serve in the US military (highest members per capita). It's been 124 years since American Samoa became an unincorporated US territory. We only gained delegate status in the US House of Representatives in 1970, non-voting member status in 1989.
Legal residents of American Samoa living there, not U.S. citizens, are not allowed to vote in the U.S. federal elections, only political party primaries. So we can help nominate a candidate, but we can't vote in the mainland election.
I voted qualified no because I feel it's fine in the wake of territorial changes for there to be periods where these things are being sorted out, so long as it's always the intention that everyone is represented.
Gabriel Pettier
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •qualified no, because "democracy" can hardly be used as an absolute qualifier, regimes can be more or less democratic, but you always have to make choices that can be argued to be non democratic, even when trying your best, it's kind of like "freedom", some freedoms will limit others.
But that would still be (well, is, as i suspect a lot of "democracies" match that criteria one way or another) a serious blow to the claim to be democratic.
Xuxxux
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Xuxxux
in reply to Xuxxux • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Xuxxux • • •@Xuxxux Germany has both statewide and constituency-level representatives in the Bundestag, right?
And there is no part of Germany that is outside of a state or constituency?
And no overseas territories?
I would say that Germany doesn't hold territory where residents are not represented in the national government.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bundestag_constituencies?wprov=sfla1
districts for Germany's lower house
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Sean Bala
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Sean Bala • • •william.maggos
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •but we let them have their own Olympics team!
(the US policy on this shit is horrible)
Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse • • •Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •no voting representation in Congress
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Evan Prodromou
in reply to Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse • • •@lpwaterhouse ha! I thought you might be talking about Cocos Island.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocos_Island?wprov=sfla1
island
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)Lawrence Pritchard Waterhouse
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Gabriel Viso :zxspectrum:
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •if those territories are housing citizens, and those citizens are not represented, then it's not a democracy.
A resident can be a valid visa holder that is not a citizen of the country. AFAIK, in all democracies you need to be citizen to vote.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Gabriel Viso :zxspectrum: • • •Gabriel Viso :zxspectrum:
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Alon
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Alon • • •Alon
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Alon • • •@Alon yeah, about 1.5% if you count other territories and DC.
I think we'd be less forgiving of the policy if the 1.5% of people disenfranchised were excluded by other criteria, like Chinese-Americans or non-binary people.
Rick Moen 🇺🇸 🇳🇴 🇬🇧
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •, good question. Did the United States, France, and United Kingdom still qualify as democracies, between the Berlin Declaration of 5 June 1945 and establishment of West Germany on 23 May 1949 (and, in regard to Austria, the Austrian State Treaty coming into force on 27 July 1955)?
I'm also worried about the present-day USA, on account of the semi-disenfranchised citizens of Western Samoa, Northern Marianas Islands, Guam, US Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico.
By the way, we law geeks still hope some day a live birth of someone having non-US citizen parentage occurs on Palmyra Atoll, thus giving rise to a truly fascinating citizenship test case: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/60013/my-daughter-was-born-on-the-palmyra-atoll-how-do-i-obtain-us-citizenship-for-he
Also by the way,, it's claimed that one Leo Watts Honea, Jr. was born shortly after WWII on Palmyra when it was part of the U.S. Territory of Hawaii, and before Palmyra was specifically excluded from State of Hawaii in 1959. So, technically Mr. Honea (reportedly later resident in the mainland US) is probably not a US citizen, though disappointingly nobody appears to have fought this out in court.
My daughter was born on the Palmyra Atoll. How do I obtain US citizenship for her?
Law Stack ExchangeEvan Prodromou
in reply to Rick Moen 🇺🇸 🇳🇴 🇬🇧 • • •Optimistic Skeptic
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •"Should a territory have voter representation in the controlling nation's electoral process?"
Frame that first, and then apply it to any nation's democratic process.
Given your poll question, many are getting tripped up with the term 'democracy' and it dilutes what *I think* you are after.
Evan Prodromou
in reply to Optimistic Skeptic • • •Poll FAQ
Evan Prodromou's BlogEvan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •M. Grégoire
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to M. Grégoire • • •Evan Prodromou
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Dave Neary
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •US citizenship issue divides American Samoans
RNZ News (RNZ)Kyle
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •Fanua 🌐
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •American Samoa native-born here, race Samoan, long time US resident now back on island. Commented on the status of American Samoa recently, please read below if interested.
We pay federal taxes & actively recruited to serve in the US military (highest members per capita). It's been 124 years since American Samoa became an unincorporated US territory. We only gained delegate status in the US House of Representatives in 1970, non-voting member status in 1989.
https://mas.to/@Fanua/112951534044218614
Fanua 🌐 (@Fanua@mas.to)
mas.toJay Stephens
in reply to Evan Prodromou • • •