J-Wild

Thursday, November 10, 2005

Voting


A good friend and I have had an ongoing debate for the last four years with regard to voting, dissent, and whether you can do either if you don't do both.

Surprisingly, I have met a lot of people who choose not to vote. The reasons vary, but they largely breakdown to three broad issues. One, they don't like the candidates, parties, or the US political system. Second, allegiance to God supersedes allegiance to any sort of secular politic. Lastly, ignorance of issues, candidates, or platforms keep someone away from the voting booth.

Trying to be brief (Joe, I really am):

I believe that God wants us to be active participants in this world. God's desire isn't for us to stand on the sidelines of this world and say "tsk, tsk, tsk." God wants us to be lights, to influence, and to participate. This country allows its' citizens to participate in governing by voting or running for office. Given that freedom, and the call of God to be active and engaged in this world I can't see how we aren't, as Christians, supposed to be active and vote in our political system? Ghandi says "Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is. "

I believe God also wants us to realize that, as His children, we are all able to be used by Him for His purposes in the world. Whether a politician supports abortion rights and gay marriage or the death penalty and preemptive war, God still uses people and even ideology for His purposes. To be sure, those issues can and must be debated by people and careful discernment is paramount when making those decisions. As a Christian I realize that scripture is and sometimes isn't clear as to how God feels about a certain issue so it's my responsibility to be informed of the political issues and weigh those against the backdrop of my faith. But to be so cynical as to remove yourself from the debate or abdicate your right to vote is wrong. It denies the work of the Holy Spirit, and says "...this world is just a sinking ship, to hell with it!"

For others who are just fed up with "the system" again I submit a quote from Mahatma Gandhi:
"If I seem to take part in politics, it is only because politics encircles us today like the coil of a snake from which one cannot get out, no matter how much one tries. I wish therefore to wrestle with the snake"
Imagine if Martin Luther King or Abraham Lincoln hadn't wrestled with the snake. What would our Nation be like if Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady had chosen not to wrestle with that snake? I dare say we would be far worse off as a Country, a people, and as Christians if they had just stayed home or stood on the sidelines.

When I hear about Americans who make an active choice not to vote it makes me angry. It is the most egregious example to me of our spoiled, fat, and ignorant American egocentricity, especially especially in light of people in the world who are desperate to be able to participate in the governing of their own nation, but are prevented from doing so. It's like we are saying "if it's not exactly what I want, then I don't want to play!" What's worse is that often times those people, who choose to remove themselves from the one instance where their voice has measurable impact, they often spend a lot of energy criticizing and degrading this country and the people who try to serve it as politicians.

Lastly, I think it is vitally important to say that God is not a liberal or a conservative. He, in all likelihood, is more liberal than anyone could imagine and more conservative than what might seem fair. For either group to claim that He is strictly theirs commits blasphemy. God is above all of that, and He uses both the liberal and conservative politician for his greater purposes despite their inherent shortcomings.

4 comments:

kenny said...

There have been times when I have missed my chance to vote - but never because I didn't want to. Not voting is our right as Americans, but how immature it seems to not vote for the reasons you gave.

I'd vote for you too, but first I'd want to know how you stand on the NY/NJ commuter tax.

Anonymous said...

May 01, 2005
Why I'll not vote
On Thursday, I face an important question. My guitar teacher will ask whether I can play an E flat minor harmonic scale at 160bpm.

Other people will confront another question. Here are some reasons why I’ll not join them and not vote.

1. It’s none of my business. The main parties are targeting the self-interest of median voters in marginal constituencies. But I’m neither a median voter nor in a marginal constituency. What’s more, no party is targeting the self-interest of single people in good health on above-average incomes. Worse still, they are not even bothering to tell us why our interests shouldn’t count.

2. I want to protest against the notion that anyone should vote in their own narrow interests. The fact is that instrumental rationality, in itself, provides no justification for voting at all. Even if you are the median voter in a marginal, the chances of your vote deciding the election outcome are vanishingly small. The costs of voting – especially if its an unpleasant walk on a rainy day – therefore outweigh the benefits. There are only two cases for voting. One is lies in diagnostic expected utility: “if I vote, maybe people like me will also vote". The other lies in symbolic rationality; you want to signal (if only to yourself) what sort of person you are.

3. No party offers a programme I want to identify with. As a minimum, I want civil liberties – no ID cards, no detention without trial, no laws against inciting religious hatred – free markets and a citizens’ basic income. No party offers these. The Greens offer two out of three. But they’re not asking for two-thirds of my vote; they want all of it. And besides, I don’t what to identify with a party many of whose members consider Michael Moore, Naomi Klein and George Monbiot to be intellectual influences.

4. The voting system is too crude. I wouldn’t expect to have to choose between Tesco and Sainsburys only once every four years. So why should my political choices have to be so crude. I don’t buy job lots.

5. All the parties, to a greater or lesser degree, believe in managerialism and hierarchy – the notion that central elites can guide our futures and over-ride the wisdom of markets. No-one’s offering direct democracy and a massive delayering of state hierarchies.

6. I want to protest against the narrowness of the political choice. For two and a half millennia the question of what is a good state has been addressed by some of the greatest minds that ever lived. And how is this tradition embodied in today’s politics? “Forward, not back”, “cleaner hospitals”. Our political choices shouldn’t be limited to what our parties are offering.

You might raise an objection here, especially so close to the 60th anniversary of VE Day. Millions of people, all of them braver than I, have died so that I might vote. Am I insulting their sacrifice by not voting?

No. What I’m saying is that my vote is a precious thing. Too precious to waste on idiots.

What worries me is that my abstention will be misinterpreted. The meeja will think it’s apathy.

This is a howling fallacy. If you were to ask Gordon Ramsey whether he preferred McDonalds or Burger King, and he replied “they’re both shit”, would you infer that he was apathetic about food? Why, then, infer that I’m apathetic about politics.

It’s not apathy I feel. It’s contempt.

May 01, 2005 in Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/2375778

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why I'll not vote:

» Britblog Roundup # 11 from Tim Worstall
Yes, it’s time once again for the Britblog Roundup, the collection of great posts from the four nations on our fair Isles. Don’t forget that you can send in your nominations for next week’s to britblog AT gmail DOT com. [Read More]

Tracked on May 01, 2005 at 02:00 PM

» "Apathy" from The Filter^
What worries me is that my abstention will be misinterpreted. The meeja will think it’s apathy. This is a howling fallacy. If you were to ask Gordon Ramsey whether he preferred McDonalds or Burger King, and he replied “they’re both [Read More]

Tracked on May 01, 2005 at 04:36 PM

» Latest Britblog Roundup from New Economist
Tim Worstall has posted Britblog Roundup # 11. Amongst the choice bits, Tom Coates looks at the history of blogging, The Filter has an interesting piece on one size fits all policies, and my old mate Stumbling and Mumbling on why he’ll not vote. [Read More]

Tracked on May 03, 2005 at 08:38 AM

» UK election: Who should you vote for? from New Economist
With pollling day this coming Thursday, Brits will soon have to decide how to cast their ballots. Chris Dillow at Stumbling and Mumbling says he will not be voting, but is not not apathetic:What I’m saying is that my vote is a precious thing. Too pr... [Read More]

Tracked on May 03, 2005 at 11:41 PM

» Why people don't vote from Make My Vote Count
Before we wolf down the papers and vomit the highlights back over this blog, an excellent summation of why voting is a bit pointless can be found here. Thanks to the always impressive General Election blog roundup for the link.... [Read More]

Tracked on May 04, 2005 at 10:38 AM

» Vote from Murky.org
Tomorrow, in case you didn't notice, is the UK general election. I would you encourage you to vote. Even if, no, especially if you think it's all a bit below you and irrelevant. Take a nice evening stroll, go past... [Read More]

Tracked on May 04, 2005 at 06:28 PM

» AN ARGUMENT AGAINST VOTING from Knowledge Problem
Lynne Kiesling Chris at Stumbling & Mumbling has written a very thought-provoking why he won't be voting in the UK election on Thursday. His reason 1 resonates with the standard Median Voter Theorem that we all know and love: 1.... [Read More]

Tracked on May 04, 2005 at 07:03 PM

» And now some reasons not to vote from Arthur's Seat
After these reasons to vote here are some equally cogent ones on why we should abstain: All the parties, to a greater or lesser degree, believe in managerialism and hierarchy – the notion that central elites can guide our futures [Read More]

Tracked on May 04, 2005 at 07:39 PM

» Election Day Prediction from The Monjo Blog


And so the time has come when the free peoples of Middle England get to take a stand against the Dark Lord Blai [Read More]

Tracked on May 05, 2005 at 11:35 AM

» Why I'll not vote from applied randomness
It’s none of my business. The main parties are targeting the self-interest of median voters in marginal constituencies. But I’m neither a median voter nor in a marginal constituency. What’s more, no party is targeting the self-interes... [Read More]

Tracked on May 05, 2005 at 08:14 PM
Comments
Stumbling, I totally agree with your sentiments and feel unable to endorse the one party to whom I should be a "natural core voter". However, I am still undecided as to whether I should vote for them just to keep the Liberal Democrats out in my local constituency.

Posted by: Snafu | May 01, 2005 at 10:18 PM

Very nicely put. Me too!

Posted by: ghytred | May 02, 2005 at 09:10 AM

I suggest we express policy goals in terms of targeted social and environmental outcomes. That would close the gap between public and politicians. See my website.

Posted by: Ronnie Horesh | May 02, 2005 at 09:42 AM

I give my wife a proxy so that she can vote for me. This relieves me of a great burden of responsibility.

Posted by: dearieme | May 02, 2005 at 03:23 PM

Why not spoil your ballot paper? This would indicate that it wasn't apathy, just that none of the candidates were worth your vote. Start a campaign (bit late now) for people to write 'noe of teh above' or some such slogan.

Posted by: Steve T | May 03, 2005 at 12:54 PM

Worthy sentiments indeed and ones that echo my, and I'm sure many other people's thoughts.

May I humbly suggest that those who agree with said thoughts, rather than voting for a party/candidate/man in a monkey suit vote instead for a change to the cause of all the above mentioned problems - the voting system.

you can do so here: www.makemyvotecount.org.uk and read about it in all sorts of interesting ways by clicking on my name that accompanies this comment.

Posted by: Paul Davies | May 04, 2005 at 10:33 AM

nicely written post, and sentiments I share at a certain level, but i have to disagree with your overall argument.

politcal parties are coalitions of political interests and you can't expect to agree with any one party 100%. in a parliamentary system coalitions are an inevitable feature of the system, and in a more proportional voting arrangement the coalitions end up being between parties rather than within them, but in either event there is horse-trading and tendencies towards the mean voter when governments get formed.

the political process then is essentailly one of forming effective coalitions, and just because the slogans of these coaltions at election time are crude - e.g. "cleaner hospitals" etc. - this does not mean that there are not substantial differences between them, and that their political message is not in fact a lot more nuanced. we do know what michael howard is really thinking beyond just his headline pledges, and fortunately most people seem not to like it very much.

it is a wishful illusion, i think, to imagine that disaggregating voting preferences across a greater number of issues, parties and voting occasions would lead to a better democracy, instanced by the likely rejection by the british public of the european constitution, due more to the influence of a hostile media than a real appreciation of its merits or otherwise.

J-Wild said...

Ok, not sure what to make of the anonymous post. Don't have a problem with it being anonymous, but I hate the cut and paste job.

I think my post adaquetly discredits all of the reasons given for not voting. I do think this person doesn't really care. In the end you have to live with your own integrity. If you want to remove yourself from the political system, that's fine, it's your right. But I don't believe your dissent or praise should be headed since you are merely an observer sitting on the sidelines thinking you know better than everyone else who's playing in the game.

Kate thanks for the vote of confidence, and you know for sure that Allison would really be running the show.

Kenny, I would vote for the tax until it was time for me to vote against it! So your vote is safe with me.

Chris Ewing said...

Yes, the cut and paste is very annoying.

Kate was correct in the previous post in that my absent vote doesn't help to change help to change to system either. I still looking for something to replace my absent vote that will help make the community a better place. The more I search and think, the more I believe that "something" which will make the community better resides not in powerful congressmen, but in the Church.

In the end I am just very cautious of the dangers that come with gaining power. Power can consume the greatest of men. Power can be so addictive that kindest man or woman will do anything to keep power. A camper taught me the lesson of David who was the simple shepherd who committed his evil acts as king. Power is impatience, power is cruel. It always envy, it is always proud. Power is rude, power is self-seeking. It is easily angered, it keeps every record of wrong. Power does not delight in the truth, but rejoices in evil. It always harms, always doubts, but it never perseveres.

CJE