Kacper Niburski / Silhouette Staff
I don’t vote.
I have neither registered as a voter nor do I plan to. I tell myself it’s to avoid the pangs of jury duty later on in my life where I’ll have to listen to the doddering tales of unpaid parking tickets and minor misdemeanors, but I think it’s something much more horrifying than some civilized game of hookie.
If I were to guess at the underlying reason for my failure to participate in the democratic process, I would point to JFK’s 1961 inauguration speech.
Before his brain became nothing more than a scattershot of ground beef, he prophetically heralded the doom of democracy, “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.”
Though these words seem to ring at the very core of political pundits, I think that we may have asked too much. Because in between an assurance of consistent political platforms, cries for transparency, and a desire for egalitarian policies meant to last years into the future, democracy has died.
Whether it is because of indifference, apathy, or general distrust of a nation, I am not sure. Maybe democracy was just a craze no better than the hula-hoop.
But what I do know for certain is that whatever remains, whatever democracy has devolved into, is the collective belief founded on individual incompetence and ignorance.
At a minimum, it has become a way of herding minds to think, act, and behave in a way that alienates some people and defines others. At best, it is mob mentality.
As voters and civilians, we subscribe ourselves to platforms that are as phony and short-lived as the smiles behind them. Each year, it is the same.
We are hammered with ideas left and right: This politician failed to reform the Consensus like he said he would. That one supported gay marriage but now doesn’t.
And there’s the politician who ate bacon for breakfast. We are overloaded with what to think, what to say, and what to feel, and so in resistance, we often feel nothing at all.
It was Oscar Wilde who said, “Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of people by the people for the people;” and like him, we have been hit too often.
We have become numb. Brain-dead. We believe everything.
We believe nothing. And we accept both as valid options in a world that makes as little sense as this one.
I’m sure there was a time when democracy, however vaguely that word can be used, meant something.
Jump back to white hair, red coats and puffy hats, and you’ll find that it signified that the sum was greater than any one part of its whole, that humanity reclaimed the freedom they were born into, and we weren’t running a circus – our circus – from the audience stands.
Back then, we were the lions themselves. The center of the show. The main act. And our roar, when expressed freely, meant something.
Nowadays surrounded by corruption and inconsistency, our cries are muffled under the hardened pillows of the very institution we have helped build. Instead of lions, we have become kittens that meow. We have become nothing short of pussies.
That is not to say any political system is better than democracy, as Winston Churchill famously said.
My parents remind me of this daily, as they retell their angst filled tales of socialism. I will never know their hunger for freedom. Nor will I understand what it means to be jailed for expressing my opinions and being shot at for others. I’m lucky and cursed in that respect.
But they, too, grumble. I see the dissatisfaction in their faces each election.
I see the indifferent shrugs for this candidate or that. To them, though they don’t say it, democracy was a way to null the pain of socialism. Over here, they were finally granted the choice of any drug prescribed to them, whether it was the Conservatives or Liberals or any other party affiliation. But in the end, they all remained just that: drugs.
Like an atheist who invariably dresses up for his funeral, my parents were forced into a system because there were no other options.
That is not freedom. That is coercion. That is democracy.
I know, I know: I don’t vote, so how can I begin even contemplating a political discourse on democracy? How can I, a person who does not participate in the democratic process, complain?
It’s simple because I think the opposite is true: by voting, one can’t complain.
They get what they voted for; that is, a certainty that the governance they receive is no better than what they believe they are entitled to. If I did the same – if I voted – I would be legitimizing the exact failings I am trying to avoid.
But if everyone didn’t vote, would that make it any better? Probably not.
I’m not claiming I have a solution, as any town crier would admit.
Instead, I am claiming that democracy has become a disease, and that may even be insulting to disease.
Because at least a disease ensures to take care of its own kind, and like most people, I can’t help the sickening feeling that I have been left behind at the ballot box.
It’s all well and good to herald the failure of democracy and its shortcomings and inability to represent our true interests, but to simply dismiss it and not suggest an alternative does little more than scream you’re a defeatist. You seem so empassioned, so where’s your fight? Fight for change. Even in a broken, seemingly bleak system merely giving up is not going to achieve change. Fight for electoral reform. Fight for legislation demanding accountability. You don’t have to like the system, the candidates, or the parties. I for one, in most cases don’t. I find myself overly-critical of most, but I don’t wave the white flag. I’m not one of those “It’s your civic duty to vote” fellows, as I’m not. I do believe you should, however, be active in seeking better alternatives and vying for them, if you’re going to dismiss what we have as a failure.
Saying democracy is failing, or failed is fine, but to combine that with not having the aspiration to seek and promote an alternative comes off as simply not caring, and rather complaining for the sake of it.
I can’t believe this type of work is published, you are close to having a revelation, and it seems like you are really working through it, but this desperately needs to be edited.
I want to get into this though because there are fallacies and you project a lot other things going around in the world but you are very close to limited government appeals which is totally void in Canadian politics.
First off the JFK comment is highly inappropriate, and as you will see by the arguments I attempt to make I am sort of an anti-democrat, but I want to get around to that. The claim “Ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country.” is the whole Utopian ideal, this is the leftist vision of for the greater good. Look at Milgram’s obedience experiments or this constant claim of following order for the greater good, this is the Nuremberg defense.
The next bit you are right on the issue but you can’t identify it. This is why what the founding fathers were doing was so important. They were attempting to make a system with limited power and divison that would make it so democracy would not decay into a tyranny of the ruling majority.
You say democracy has died, but perhaps it is just running its course. Democracy has never worked, in human history it has always been a complete failure, the cause is demagogues which I think is what you really need to get into.
Now it’s really hard to go forward with demagogues with the kind of understanding of parliament you are implying. Government is in no way democracy, Liechtenstein has a healthy government with a monarchy rule.
I like how you reference the erosion starting from colonial times, it is this whole idea that even if now we manage to reset the clocks we will be subject to the same tyranny. The whole price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
Demoagoguery is the enomy of liberty and serves the interest of power seekers across the political spectrum. Government attracts all those who enjoy using power over others and those who convince themselves that average people need “smart” people to take care of them. And only demagogues can provide the “wisdom” to appoint those who should rule over us. When the goal of politcal action is no longer the of liberty, no words other than demagoguery can describe the despicable nature of politics.
Demagogues manipulate a political issue in a manner to obscure or distort truth with emotionalism and prejudice. The goal of demagogues is to achieve power at all costs.
You have great ideas, but these are nothing new, it benefits us to do our history and research these arguments which have already been fought.
The trouble with democracy is not so much its workings at any one time; the trouble is the dynamic it sets in place that gradually changes a small government into a big one. It was precisely to prevent that from happening that the founding generation in the United States borrowed the idea of a republic from the Romna experience. Not everything was to be subjected to mob rule; voting was in place to rotate the management of small government that operated under strict rules.
Democracy tramples on the rights of the individual for the will of the majority, this is why we have non-democratic branches and why in the United States we weren’t allowed to vote for Senators until the 1900s, they were appointed and served the state’s interest, besides Rand Paul I don’t know any current representatives that are true to their duties in protecting the state.
Another thing I didn’t want to leave out is government shouldn’t be built on the majority rule as they can rule for apartheid or whatever. The revolution contained only 1/3 of the colonial population, which was very small at the time. Government should be there to protect our natural rights.