Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Switchboard >

Don't vote, it encourages them!

Brigade du jour

04:42 / 15.01.03

Is refusing to vote, on grounds other than sheer ignorance, a valid political position?

A friend of mine once suggested to me when I was in the midst of a fit of childish, arm-folding "I won't vote it's all poo" moods that it might be worth going to the polling booth and posting an empty ballot paper, or perhaps writing an appropriately anarchic message on it first. "None of the above are representative of my needs" or "fuck the government", for example.

At the last general election in the UK, I believe I'm right in saying, there was the lowest turnout since ... well, for a long time, perhaps even ever since every adult was eligible. Would check the fact, but will lose concentration if I do. Anyway, the point is that lots of people seem to be utterly disillusioned with contemporary conventional political parties, surely tbis is something worth discussing, celebrating, condemning, take your pick.

On the other hand, broadening the debate somewhat, is it the electoral system itself people are disillusioned with?

Quoting Billy Connolly in the thread title btw, (dis)credit where it's due!

05:16 / 15.01.03

What reforms of the electoral system would be possible? At first i thought more proportional representation - but that it widely used in European Parliament elections which have notoriously poor turnout. We shouldn't write if off though.

It is quite odd/depressing to hear about politicians rushing around to visit marginal constituenices before an election because they know that they are the key to victory. Not how many people vote for you but how many people you can swing to your side in certain areas. Almost makes it seem like victory through bureaucracy.

Despite that if you believe in democracy it is important to use your vote. Even if there is no party that you agree with entirely there must be someone you feel slightly inclined towards.

Our Lady of The Two Towers

15:46 / 15.01.03

I've voted in local elections and general and have never once consigned anyone to public office, but despite my cynicism about the worth of our public officials still feel it necessary to have made the effort. If you can't be bothered to go to your local polling station a postal vote is a piece of piss to organise, and there should be someone who's policies are close to what you want. As the last round of council elections showed, the Far Right can get their vote out, which is reason enough for anyone who doesn't support the BNP to go out and vote for someone else.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

16:39 / 15.01.03

I have been considering getting an online petition together for the inclusion of a "None of The Above" check box on voting slips, as a statement along the lines of :

I wish to exercise my right within a democracy to be represented in the governing of my society, and understand the issues and positions of all the candidates. However, I have absolutely no faith in any of them, and wish this to be noted in the final analysis of the election results.

There was a debate over this recently, and the usual pundits turned out, patronising, and bluntly stated it was pointless, as people don't not-vote because they are unhappy with the options, they not-vote because they are apathetic, lazy and stupid (!).

I believe shitloads of young, essentially disenfranchised people would flock to this kind of petition. Obviously needs to be worded better than I have done, thinking on my feet and all that. But what a fucking hilarious result if the next General election shows something like a 65% turnout for "none of the above".

That'll wipe the shitty smirk of a few faces.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

16:40 / 15.01.03

Sorry, forgot : What do you think?

Our Lady of The Two Towers

18:58 / 15.01.03

Well, I thought I heard a report last year that someone, possibly Robin Cook was given the job of looking at putting a 'none of the above' box on future ballot papers, but I don't expect a huge movement on this purely for the reason you suggest: The government wouldn't like it to be official that the public have much faith in either them or the other clowns.

Brigade du jour

21:49 / 15.01.03

Damn right the government wouldn't like it. I however think it's a brilliant idea! The ideal outcome from such a result would be something like loads more options available, new parties or perhaps existing parties who happen to be very small suddenly gaining tons more political weight.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

00:52 / 16.01.03

Of course they wouldn't like it- blaming the lack of participation in the elctoral process on "apathy" saves them from having to answer too many difficult questions. "Oh yeah, they would have voted for us but they just couldn't be arsed."

Brigade du jour

01:47 / 16.01.03

Exactly. I had what alcoholics refer to as a moment of clarity yesterday, while looking through newspaper articles (it's my job okay?) and their attendant photos of Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and the like, and I suddenly realised to myself - "Fuck! We put these people in charge of nuclear weapons! These speccy twats have the power to destroy us!"

Of course, an elementary knowledge of the concept of government makes this abundantly clear, but somehow reading about the shit that goes down worldwide has blinded me to the actual realities of the situation. I couldn't see, as they say, the wood for the goddamn trees.

Big sigh. Anyway, that's my forty-five penceworth for now. Probably get angry again later and bitch some more, hope that's okay everybodypeeps.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:16 / 16.01.03

OK, a vew votes of support there. So how about it? If I set up www.noneoftheabove.com (haven't checked availability yet), will you guys help me with some virals, perhaps a few others on the board, and any other fora of which you may be a member, see if we can't snowball a big vibe, and present our 'democratically' elected 'leaders' with a true referendum on the voting process currently in place?

I mean, if the petition gets enough signatures, and enough letters are written, eventually, in theory, the wheels will have to creak into some sort of motion.

Exercise what little power you are supposed to have, I say.

Are you with me on this? *Revolutionary salute*

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:20 / 16.01.03

Ok, checked it -

noneoftheabove.org is exactly the same thing in California (!)

noneoftheabove.uk.org is available

noneoftheabove.com is available.

If you think its worthwhile, I'll get on the case today.

STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK

08:50 / 16.01.03

I think it's worthwhile. I don't thing any wheels will actually be set in motion (come on, so far they've ignored 400,000 people saying invading Iraq was a really fucking stupid idea) but if we get enough people, at least people will notice. It's gotta be pretty gutting to have to admit that no, people aren't lazy, they've actively cast aside their hard-won democratic freedoms because they don't like you . I'd be offended, at any rate. At best, I reckon we could get them to even consider for the teensiest second that maybe they're going about this all wrong?

Do it. Every little helps.

And on the subject of voting, I never thought I;d say this, but I wish the fucking Tories would get their act together, scum that they are. It may be a cliche but it's true- an effective opposition is necessary for democracy. If you're being challenged strongly every step of the way, you're really gonna have to come up with some pretty good reasons for what you wanna do. As it stands right now, Blair can do whatever the fuck he wants (until the Lib Dems take their chance), knowing that not only has nobody got any better ideas, there's nobody expressing any ideas at all. (Chaoists may recall the office of Insubordinate, which I've always felt served the same purpose).

Phex: Dorset Doom

12:26 / 16.01.03

Noneoftheabove.com sounds like a great idea. Speaking of getting virals out there, postings from the MTV2.co.uk message board are frequently read out on air and the anchorman has expressed a few negative opinions on politics and the war on Iraq, so there might be a chance to get the site address out to the 'right people', so to speak.
The message behind it has to be a little more refined than 'fuck you I won't do what you tell me', and has to take in Mao's point about casting aside our hard-won democratic freedoms. The message has to be that, yeah, we like having a democracy, but true democracy should be able to appreciate when it has gone far enough.

Brigade du jour

20:08 / 16.01.03

noneoftheabove - me is well up for it. After all, the whole point, as plenty have already said, has to be to articulate our disillusionment in more practical and noticeable ways than simple abstinence.

Count me in.

16:41 / 20.01.03

Oh no, ‘none of the above’ is contrary to the idea of democracy, because … um, well, because you’ve got to choose one of the ones that are there. Voting’s about giving you a voice in Parliament, and it has to be one of the forms of voice that’s already there, because the history of Parliament has shown what a great success that has been, and it’s childish that suggesting as means of showing a government just how weak their authority is, and how little of a mandate they actually have, is a good idea.

As we all know – and as the usual pundits will always tell us – people don’t vote for one single reason : they’re stupid. Interesting to think that if politics was a business – say, a cinema with falling ticket sales – the parties would say tough, it’s market economics, you’re not giving people what they want. But then, of course, they’re so deeply immersed in the whole business they’ve forgotten that the political system is supposed to be a tool, a means for getting things done – they see it as an end in itself, and that’s why parties mistake staying in power with the wise and just exercise of power. Two wildly different things.

In case it’s not clear, I’m very much in favour of the ‘none of the above’ option. Why not? What’s to be scared of ? Finding out exactly how many people don’t like the existing parties ? And before anyone gives me that old thing about ‘well, what’s your alternativeto the existing parties ?’, let me ask : can I have my taxes back to research it ? What with them being taken from me by a government I didn’t vote for, and them spending the money on wars instead of (breach of social contract here, surely?) on stuff like pensions and grants for students and hospitals and the like. As Bill Hicks puts it, they’ve mis-spent our taxes. And so is it okay if I have my cash back to do some of that research ?

And all this makes me wonder : just how low a vote in favour of them would a party have to have to admit they don’t have a mandate ? As a percentage of the people living in the country, I mean ? 30% ? 20% ? 10%? Or would a party NEVER admit that ? Anyone?

DBC

17:31 / 20.01.03

By definition a none of the above option isn't going to be a vote winner so I can't really see any government getting enthusiastic about it. Definitely a good idea although it is probably wishful thinking to put much of the voter no show down to anything other than apathy.

There are parties which you can vote for if you wish to see higher taxes and higher public spending, less warmongering, etc but I suppose it is the bipolarisation that puts people off. In many ways the current government is just a continuation from Major style politics. Maybe you need reforms such as PR - but that hasn't boosted turn out in the European elections much.

04:01 / 21.01.03

It can be argued that NOT voting, or deliberatly spoiling your vote is what the parties in power would want...

Take the american system... it's always going to be Democrats or Republican parties as long as 2 people are voting, because the disillusioned ones ain't shown up... it's only the partisan faithful who are. In the states it seems they've convinced their entire population it will always be those two increasingly similar parties. Which is true, especially if people don't get out and vote for alternate parties.

So I think the answer lies in promoting, or developing alternate political parties and action groups. If enough people can climb on to that bandwagon, they'll notice ya.

And then try to exterminate you, but only in a paranoid world right?

right?

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:25 / 21.01.03

it is probably wishful thinking to put much of the voter no show done to anything other than apathy.

Cheers for the contrary opinion...In this case, to what would you attribute the rise in voter apathy? Why is the turnout for local and general elections diminishing to the point of minority mandate? Why do people just not give a shit anymore?

12:51 / 21.01.03

Mu, while I do think the none of the above option is a good idea I don't think that the people who are motivated enough to go to a polling station and then not vote for anyone at all are going to be numerous. Even if we have lost interest in the obvious choices there are still going to be fringe parties that reflect our views - e.g. higher taxes for increased public spending.

Reasons for falling turnout? In the UK perhaps a lack of belief in the power of the vote. The Blair and Major governments seem to follow similar policies and without PR there is little chance of a minority party shaking things up. But PR is part of European elections and they suffer from even worse turnout. Perceived distance from and lack of importance of the parliament is probably the reason there.

Maybe the rise of direct action has something to do with it. Consumer action, such as boycotting a product, is easier, more effective and perhaps even more satisfying than voting for national governments that cannot effectively control multinational corporations.

One problem with a none of the above campaign is that it is negative. It is against everything without being for anything. Low turnout is a problem but it is also an opportunity. If people aren't motivated enough to vote for what is currently on offer then there is room to offer a positive alternative.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

16:07 / 21.01.03

Interesting. I had assumed that the rise in direct action and activism was a direct result of lack of choice, i.e in the absence of a coherent and credible opposition, the electorate take matters into their own hands (or try to) hence the countryside march, increase of demonstrations in general etc.

I don't think that the people who are motivated enough to go to a polling station and then not vote for anyone at all are going to be numerous

Its a good point, of course, and kind of the crux of the whole idea I suppose...But the vote is not exactly not for anyone at all, so much as a clear indication of dissatisfaction with the options on offer...at the very least it may galvanise those with the inclination to get off their arse and stand for election to really go for it, if a large proportion of voters expressed contempt for the offered parties...

One problem with a none of the above campaign is that it is negative. It is against everything without being for anything

This is true, but a good way to start demonstrating the need for radical reform and options within the party system...

Hmmm. Food for thought indeed, indeed.

16:37 / 21.01.03

A "none of the above" campaign could be very useful in forcing policy reform but, if it actually appears on the ballot sheet, as Flowers pointed out, it would leave the gate open for extremist parties like the BNP. Another possibility is that some kind of coalition government be formed, leaving us with no opposition. That could go really wrong.

17:26 / 21.01.03

A Borda count would be much more fulfilling. That's what I say. Any multiple choice ranking would just RAWK.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

18:17 / 21.01.03

Ah, exactly. A step towards proportional representation.

I just want the box cos the website RAWKS...

Appeals to my nihilistic nature.

Bordacount.com sounds like some kind of Northern Ireland mindfuck.

10:14 / 30.01.03

BUMP.

On this theme:

Disagree wildly with much of what's being said here, and would point to the fact provided that 90% of people vote in Belgium, where it's compulsory... so what of the other 10% ? How are they punished ?

"You must vote for me under penalty of law" = bad
"You must vote, even if there's no-one who accurately reflects your opinions" = perfectly acceptable, apparently. Hmmm.

And I love the way that implicit in the whole idea is that we should vote because the parties are so damn good that we must be at fault (always underlying anything on this theme when discussed by politicians - funny, that). Doesn't sound like the whole free market 'supply and demand' thing to me, which is apparently the way everything's supposed to be run nowadays...

15:57 / 30.01.03

Well, I have to disagree, and I'm fresh from a political science course so I have access to exactly the language to do it.

The reason we have two parties in the US has nothing to do with ideology or mass mind control -- it's because of our electoral system. It's called Single Member District voting and it awards the victory to the guy who gets the most votes within a district. Ie, if Joe Schmoe, Joe Blow and Joe Goosestep run for office within a district, and Schmoe gets 40%, Blow gets 35% and Goosestep gets 25%, Schmoe gets total control of the government within that district. A 40% constituency gives him 100% power. This system tends toward a two-party structure because candidates have better odds of gaining office if they join a party, and the fewer parties there are the better it is for the candidates. A process called co-optation allows for the formation of new parties or for regional/hot-button issues to make the political mainstream, but it's tied into the competition between two parties and doesn't really give "the people" access to government.

Under your PR system, you'd have a district where each candidate gets a number of seats in proportion to the percentage of the election they carried -- Joe Goosestep would control approx. 25% of the votes on any given issue. This gives smaller parties, such as regional parties or single-issue parties, access to government and encourages political alliances between parties. This is why the Green Party is actually a going concern in Europe, but a major disruption in the US.

In summation, protest-by-abstention is totally pointless. It won't encourage "them" to change the system -- it'll only encourage them to ignore you. Especially you PR people -- your electoral system is specifically designed to accomodate this kind of problem. Form a party! Call it the None Of The Above Party if you want (at one time, there was an American Know Nothing Party), but you don't have an argument for neglecting the system out of picque.

05:04 / 09.02.03

I don't think it's worthwhile not to vote.

I think putting energy into supporting a candidate who you would like to see in office, or running yourself would be much more productive. For the price of signing up, you get free advertising and space in newspapers and a chance to offer an alternative dialogue to the kooky rightwingers in your area/constituency/ward. Why not more choices instead of less? I would love to see a ballot with 50 names on it, personally. Pro-rep would be nice too, but that's really another story.

Brigade du jour

21:50 / 10.02.03

Standing for election yourself? Fantastic idea. I guess it beats simple abstention, well it definitely does actually.

I think the problem is impatience - if the 'system' (for want of a better way of putting it) can't be changed quickly, it's tempting to believe that it can't be changed at all. Indeed that nothing can be changed at all.

Lots of people making a small difference at local level (I'm not saying 'grass-roots', it's a patronising expression and it smells!) adds up to a great benefit in both the short and long term.