The US is notable, but in a unique position since its size and position make it very unlikely that it would have to fight an existential war.
Can’t find much on Denmark though. I suppose that during WW2 they didn’t get much of a say. But in previous wars Denmark was still a monarchy. The only other major war in which they didn’t immediately capitulate were the Schleswig wars, but then the Danish parliament was still very young (1849, wars happened in 1848 and 1864).
Suspending elections for the time being is a bit more common, especially if voting would be too dangerous for the people.
The US has never suspended elections however. During the civil war, during the war of 1812 when the white house was burned down, during every war on the mainland of the US, during the draft of Vietnam — the US has never stopped doing elections.
Most countries that suspended elections also did it last in a time before long distance communication was popular, much less instantaneous lossless communication being cheap and widely available. There’s no reason to use the excuse of ‘safety’ in the age of the internet.
The only real reasons to suspend elections in this century is incompetence or corruption. That’s it. Which do you believe is leading Ukraine or Russia?
Voting over the internet brings election integrity issues. That’s why almost all countries use physical ballots still.
Holding elections, especially if part of the country is occupied, could also be seen as “corrupt”. For example, if Ukraine were to hold elections right now, Donetsk and Luhansk could not vote in them because Russia occupies those territories. This would deprive the Ukrainians there of their right to vote. And one has to wonder if turnout will be any good if going out to vote risks being drone striked (especially since voting locations would make easy targets).
Doing everything online might work, but afaik I’m not aware of people promoting that since it’s susceptible to hacks, DDOS, etc… It’s just not secure.
The US is notable, but in a unique position since its size and position make it very unlikely that it would have to fight an existential war.
Can’t find much on Denmark though. I suppose that during WW2 they didn’t get much of a say. But in previous wars Denmark was still a monarchy. The only other major war in which they didn’t immediately capitulate were the Schleswig wars, but then the Danish parliament was still very young (1849, wars happened in 1848 and 1864).
Suspending elections for the time being is a bit more common, especially if voting would be too dangerous for the people.
The US has never suspended elections however. During the civil war, during the war of 1812 when the white house was burned down, during every war on the mainland of the US, during the draft of Vietnam — the US has never stopped doing elections.
Most countries that suspended elections also did it last in a time before long distance communication was popular, much less instantaneous lossless communication being cheap and widely available. There’s no reason to use the excuse of ‘safety’ in the age of the internet.
The only real reasons to suspend elections in this century is incompetence or corruption. That’s it. Which do you believe is leading Ukraine or Russia?
Voting over the internet brings election integrity issues. That’s why almost all countries use physical ballots still.
Holding elections, especially if part of the country is occupied, could also be seen as “corrupt”. For example, if Ukraine were to hold elections right now, Donetsk and Luhansk could not vote in them because Russia occupies those territories. This would deprive the Ukrainians there of their right to vote. And one has to wonder if turnout will be any good if going out to vote risks being drone striked (especially since voting locations would make easy targets).
Doing everything online might work, but afaik I’m not aware of people promoting that since it’s susceptible to hacks, DDOS, etc… It’s just not secure.