[_-david-_]

The Australians voted for these parties who then pass this policy. This policy is extreme. That sure seems like extremist politics to me.

I don't get why you are talking about the US. This policy was passed by Australia. I am not saying that non mandatory voting will avoid extremist politics. All I am saying is that mandatory voting is not a silver bullet to avoiding extremism.

[joshschreuder]

The Australians who voted for these parties largely do not give two shits about the bills, because a) unlike HN, they don't understand them, why they're bad or any of the consequences, and b) because the media monopoly here ensures they don't get adequate explanation or coverage, which in turn feeds a).

I agree with GP that this is less about the Australian population being extremist or facilitating extremism as much is it is about voter apathy and a lack of proper coverage or education on these bills.

[_-david-_]

Just because the average person doesn't know what bills are passed is irrelevant to what I am saying.

All I am saying is that forcing people to vote has no impact on stopping extreme policies. If you were correct Australia wouldn't have passed this and other similar laws over the past few years.

I agree that voter apathy can lead to extreme policies passing. That point is irrelevant to what I was trying to convey that extreme policies are still passed despite mandatory voting.

[SilverRed]

I feel like even when they do get coverage it doesn't matter. This issue has had plenty of coverage but the situation is pretty much "yeah? well what are you gonna do about it? Both parties support it"

Even the greens have been supporting objectionable laws relating to tech. I feel a good chunk of people do care but there is not a single thing that can be done about it.