[lit-ideas] Re: Theory of democracy...
- From: Teemu Pyyluoma <teme17@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 00:43:35 -0700 (PDT)
--- Robert Paul <Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
> .John expresses the hope that democracy will work.
> But his hope is based on
> idealism. Voters don't know, and worse yet, don't
> care, what they are voting
> on.<
>
> This may be true in national elections; it is surely
> less true the closer one
> gets to a local initiative or referendum.
>
> I find the claim that voters don't care what they
> are voting on (as if they're
> just making random marks on something nomially
> thought of as a 'ballot')
> unconvincing. But I'm sure these conclusions aren't
> meant to apply to anyone on
> this list.
>
Agree on local elections. But I do think we need to
futher qualify "voting for". I can think of seven more
or less rational ways to choose what to vote.
1) Voting based on interest group. At least on the
multi-party system I participate in this is very
typical. What it means that different political
parties stand for a portion of population that
presumably has shared interests. For instance my
country cousin might vote for the Center party with
strong agrarian background, while I vote with liberal,
urban, educated
group for Greens. It is entirely possible that me and
my cousin don't really disagree on ideological bases,
we just have different interests and concerns. The
upside of this kind of political system is that
(ideally) political decision making takes balances
different interests, downside is the problem of what
do you do as a voter when your representatives fail
you.
2) Voting based on how things are in general. Basicly
your vote based on whether you, the nation, your
relatives, home town, etc. are doing better or worse
now then they were when the current goverment came to
power. As John McCreary pointed out this is a useful
and indeed essential reality check on a goverment.
Problem is ofcourse that this implies that the
government is omnipotent, which not only leads to
irrational evaluation of the government but is also in
spirit against the very nature of liberal democracy,
elaborate checks and balances on government power.
3) Voting based on ideology. This means voting for
someone who shares your beliefs. Problem is this is
somewhat divorced from reality because whether what
you believe in is actually advanced is strictly
speaking irrelevant, for example consider what exactly
have all those casting a Pro Life vote achieved.
4) Voting based on intent. This IMO goes to the heart
of the problems with modern politics. Candidate tells
you what he wants to achieve, if you agree you vote
for him. This is the language of politicians: Patriot
Act protects you, trade barries protect jobs, free
trade promotes growth... The politician only tells you
why, not how, at what cost and what the alternatives
would be.
5) Voting based on party affiliation. Party
affiliation means that you are in some ways involved
with the party, you are in a way voting for yourself,
that is what the party stands for is not something
external to you. Fine, but once again what do you do
if your party fails you?
6) Voting based on single issue(s). Everyone has pet
causes, the key here is that the person voting is also
very familiar with the issue. For example, I care
about copyright law as applied to computers and
internet. I don't disagree with protecting the income
of artists (stated intent) but disagree strongly on
how this would be achieved (DRM technology, dragonian
surveilance and penalties...) both in terms of
effectiveness and costs. This is where I see more and
more (young?) people going.I think this is a positive
development as many of these issues are so complicated
they require considerable effort to understand, and
thus the only way to balance interests with
corporations and other large institutions is to have
dedicated group of volunteers influencing decision
makers. But the problem is that the person your voting
is going to decide a lot of other issues too.
7) Voting based on broad political plan. This the
ideal voter who looks at the plans of different
parties, compares them, considers what various special
interests group and specialists think of them, makes a
judgement on candidates ability to implement the plan
and so on. This requires time, effort and solid
general education, and I'd be positively suprised if
10% population actually does it.
The important thing here is that party affiliated (5),
single issue (6) and broad agenda (7) voters
contribute to open, public policy discussion. And it
is this, not elections as such that is what democracy
is all about.
Cheers,
Teemu
Helsinki, Finland
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
