In the days of my youth, the above was an anthem of resistance, shouted in defiance of the American draft sending young men to fight and to die in Vietnam. As a Canadian, I watched from the sidelines but nonetheless admired them for their conviction and willingness to go to jail for their beliefs.
Unfortunately, applied in a different context, that declaration is a badge of dishonour.
Those who have read some of my recent blog entries will know that I feel nothing but contempt for the majority of citizens in Ontario who refused to go to the polls in our recent election, one that saw a minority responsible for a second Doug Ford majority government. And while many insist that our first-past-the post system is responsible for such a victory, I lay the blame entirely upon those who could not rouse themselves from their couch torpor to exercise a foundational element of democracy.
And I see I am not alone in this sentiment. Martin Regg Cohn warns us not to fall into the trap that has ensnared the Americans by claiming that our results are illegitimate.
The emerging narrative is that the Tories somehow won a tainted election, diminished by a dreadful electoral turnout. It goes something like this:
Doug Ford’s Tories won 83 seats? True, but it’s not a true majority, the critics counter.
They imply that Progressive Conservative victory came thanks to a record low turnout — 43.5 per cent of Ontario’s 10.7 million eligible voters cast ballots in this election. As if this low percentage is the top-line number that matters most.
As if people staying at home — in their armchairs — exercise a veto from a distance that somehow invalidates, disenfranchises or delegitimizes those of us who bothered to cast ballots in a free and fair election. As if abstention trumps participation.
Rewriting recent history to favour one's ideological leanings doesn't work, according to Regg Cohn.
The unspoken implication is that not voting must be counted as a vote of non-confidence in the winning party, losing parties, or the electoral system. That is a remarkably presumptuous attempt to read the minds of all eligible voters.
Do we dare assume that people who are entirely apathetic have a hidden preference, as opposed to simply being uninterested? Do we have grounds to presume that a significant proportion of non-voters would vote if only we changed the electoral system by bringing in proportional representation, as its advocates claim?
A 2007 Ontario referendum put paid to the notion that PR is the panacea; it was rejected, a result that many of its supporters refuse to accept ... on the grounds that there was a low turnout.
One can clearly see the problem here.
Ultimately, in my view and in my personal philosophy, it is time for people to grow up and accept the bitter truth of their own apathy instead of the sweet lie that they abstained from voting out of some kind of principled position. In other words, they need to take a good look in the mirror and see what it really reflects.
Ahhh Lorne, I completely agree with you that those who did not vote are responsible (at least in part) for the outcome, you may be surprised, perhaps disgusted, to learn that this fellow, who spent years writing the blog Democracy Under Fire did not 'rouse myself from my couch' long enough to vote! I am not going to list a whole bunch of excuses to say where that decision came from but will try and lay out my reasoning, the first and most obvious being the effort required to get my old arse off the couch.
ReplyDeleteI must say that yes, I did want to vote, mostly to remove the current premier from office but we all know that my vote does not do that, my vote elects the LOCAL MPP who whilst I dont like his leader or his party he is (so far as I know) a reasonable choice. The next issue is of course the alternative choices and once again we are forced to choose a local representative who in all probability will have little on no say in the actual decisions made by government in the unlightly occurrence that they AND their party will be elected to government.
Now we come to the actual process of voting, I cannot speak to how it works in the big city but out here in rural Ontario it can be challenging, the polling stations can be some distance from our residence, even in the next community, but for us county bumpkins its not a 5 min walk. I my own case as a senior who no longer has his car on the road I would need to 'vote by mail' or arage for transportation, I thought to vote by mail but that option seems to be an exercise in frustration! The mere reading of the instructions for doing just that (received barely two weeks before election day) left me shaking my head. Send this in with that to get this back to do this and send that in but if you do want to vote in person you now cant do that ….say WHAT?
Seems I can do my banking on line with a couple of clicks once set up but our governments who can ensure that we have drivers licenses and get our OAS cheques etc etc without a problem cannot set up a system to let us vote on line. That our various provincial governments and the federal government cannot get together and agree on ONE system to identify individuals for such things is crazy!
So there no excuses just a pissed of old man who would have really liked to vote (even though his choice would have made NO difference with the outcome) IF it had been easy or at least not a major hassle.
Thats it 'rant off'
'Rural'
Thanks for your very frank commentary here, Rural. Of course, I am making a generalization when I describe those who did not vote, and am cognizant of the fact that there may be extenuating circumstances involved for some, as you outlined here. However, that does not absolve those who had easy access to polling stations (the majority of voters, methinks) nor those who simply were 'too busy' to vote.
DeleteYour point about online voting is well-taken, and I have never real heard a compelling reason not to have that option assuming, of course, the security of the system.
I’ve made the sweeping statement before.. about what I believe is the modern day coup d’état Lorne. ‘capture the Media and the palace is yours’
ReplyDeleteThere are better non partisan persons than I to validate the Ideology, Intensions, Capability.. indeed Current Reality of current MainMedia Ownership / Control in Canada.
If I’m correct - that at least 75% of Canadian MainMedia is servicing ‘Conservative Politics’ ie Federal & Provincial ‘Electoral Control’ & their obvious Vested Interest Powerhouses.. then we can start looking at Cause & Effect re an astonishing renewal of Doug Ford’s No/Cut contract
‘Effect’ ? Why your lament, anger, shock! Your topic ! Why !?
How can this be ?
If I’m correct.. or at least in the bare bones of it.. then you have the true direction to rail against.. - the insidious Cause.. not just the Effect.. the source of the Infection or ‘malaise’ - the reason or ideology.. indeed why the Failure to Vote happens
sal
An interesting perspective, Sal, and one that no doubt has validity. There are only a few mainstream media publications that I read and follow, and the likes of the Sun and Post Media publications are not among them. Those, of course, have a well-known bias and agenda, and seem to find a willing audience of true believers.
DeleteI saw an interesting excerpt on Twitter yesterday, in which a much younger Noam Chomsky is being interviewed by a British journalist. Chomsky convincingly addresses the very issue you raise about what the 'bosses' want and expect from their journalists.
that’s an interview I need to track down !
DeleteI looked for it as I was writing the above comment but couldn't find it. I should have retweeted it.
DeleteTo not chose is to choose, Lorne.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Owen. It is one of the sad facts about contemporary democracy.
Delete