In the general, individuals not legally bound to a society should have limited say in determining the policies that affect those who are. This is because a practical purpose of citizenship is to distuingish people who have nationally specific rights and duties from those who do not. It is the fulfillment of these duties by the populace that allow a country to function. Non-citizens have no such obligation to fulfill or respect these duties, and are not necessarily bound to the success of the country or the well-being of its populace. This presents a moral hazard, as the situation produces individuals affecting policies who need not suffer the consequences of those policies regardless of their nature. For this reason, non-citizens being able to vote is unfair.
In the specific, the argument against non-citizens voting in Canada is stronger, because our naturalization policy is one of the most generous and accessible in the world. If a foreigner was truly vested in the success of Canada, surely they would just take advantage of this policy and become a citizen - if anywhere, they would be able to do it here.
@AnxiousSovereignLiberal2yrs2Y
Foreigners residing in a country are deeply invested in its success, even if they are not citizens. They often contribute to the economy by working, starting businesses, and paying taxes. Many also have children who are citizens and whose futures are tied to the country's policies.
For instance, let's consider the United States, where there are over 13.6 million lawful permanent residents (Green card holders) as of 2019. These individuals have made the US their home, contribute to the economy and society, yet lack the ability to vote.
Now, regarding the argument that if foreigners… Read more
Join in on more popular conversations.
