Britain goes to the polls tomorrow to elect a round of representatives for the European Parliament, for UK Local Authorities and the office of Mayor of London.
Or, more accurately, about one-third of Britain goes to the polls. The other two-thirds cannot be bothered and, while I entirely sympathise with their attitude of non-engagement, it is my intention to buck the trend and cast my vote. I will explain.
I have never even attempted to conceal my contempt for the ‘democratic process’ as presently configured. In modern parlance, ‘democracy’ has become a euphamism for the perpetuance of a permanent political class, devoted to conducting their mischief without hindrance, objection or opposition. When all political candidates are required to sign up to a rigidly conformist and hegemonic agenda, the process of voting becomes a waste of time. At best, it is endorsement of the status quo, a rubber-stamped approval for ‘business as usual’. However, I am not averse to using existing mechanisms to achieve ends of which I approve and I would be churlish to deny that there are times when a convergence of circumstances gives rise to interesting opportunities to give that boring, monochromatic old status quo a damned good kicking.
Tomorrow is just such a time for there appears to be something of a headwind building up behind the UK Independence Party. If various well-publicised opinion polls are to be believed, then it is entirely possible that UKIP could shove the execrable Liberal Democrats into third place and possibly even nip the buttocks of the milquetoast Conservative opposition. That makes them a cause worth voting for.
A number of people have been quick to point out that some of UKIP’s policies may be regarded as highly illiberal (e.g. they favour immigration controls) and quite inconsistent with a free society. That may well all be true but, that fact is that I simply do not care because their flagship, numero uno policy, nay their raisons d’etre is British withdrawal from the shoddy, cankerous mess of the European Union. The rest does not matter (and, besides, UKIP are probably no more hostile to immigration than is our current Labour Home Secretary).
With all the other political candidates offering a choice between spending squinty-million-billion on the public sector or spending squinty-million-billion-zillion on the public sector, the heretical bad-boys of UKIP shine with the enticing lustre of a semi-buried precious gem. Having endured the slings, arrows, barbs and whale-harpoons of sustained media hostility, they are the ones who are truly up for a scrap. Phooey to all this dull ‘consensus’, UKIP are riding into town looking for trouble. Even their list of ‘5 Essential Freedoms’ includes ‘Freedom from Political Correctness’. I have no idea what they mean by this and, possibly, neither do they but it’s fighting-talk and refreshing as a shower of lemon zest.
I doubt very much whether they will ever form a government but this bunch of quarellsome bruisers is squaring up to the effete political establishment and I love them for it. A good result for them tomorrow will have the scions of the media/political nomenklatura running around sqauwking like a load of indignant hens (“abolish UKIP”, “abolish voting”, “abolish Britain”…”waaaahhhhhh”) and for that spectacle alone it would be worth voting for them.
But it is worth voting for them for other reasons too. A solid UKIP vote tomorrow will not herald any revolutions. Nor will it prove the catalyst for any material change either in the short term or possibly at all. It will not even reverse or slow down the disastrous process of political integration in Europe. But what it will do is to puncture the smug confidence of the ruling guard and remind them that they may not always have things quite so under control. It will send a ripple of fear through the corridors of comfortably assumed power and make their cherished orthodoxies look just a little vulnerable. In the words of Jack Nicholson in ‘Batman’: “This town needs an enema”.
Tomorrow we have an opportunity to light a candle instead of just cursing the darkness. I have impotently cursed the darkness for far too long. Now is the time to light candles. Many, many candles.
What’s the chance of sending a few of these UKIP guys over here to the States? We have a Congress that needs an enema.
Anything that disrupts, even for a little while, the insane march to surrender sovereignty to the EU has to be good. Regards
The next question is whether you should vote for the UKIP at a general election.
Nice Batman reference — and now that I think about it, Mr David Carr does have a bit of Jack Nicholson (as The Joker) about him…
Just a note to say that not everyone declines to vote out of feelings of non-engagement (though I’m sure you realise that, David). Luckily, despite paying all manner of taxes, I am not allowed to vote and so am saved the trouble of agonising over whether to do so or not.
As an intersting side bar, ALL documents and envelopes for the secret postal ballot have the same bar code on them.
David – I hear ya. But could you explain what your ideal “democracy” would look like, or give me a link if you have explained it elsewhere?
Not surprisingly, I came to the exactly the same decision as Mr. Carr – and for almost exactly the same reasons – which is why my postal vote went in over the weekend.
And, picking up Peter Bocking’s point above, that means I am now on ‘a little list’. There has not been a ‘secret ballot’ in this country for many, many years. All UK voting papers are individually identifiable, though no politician will admit it unless you hold his toes to an electric fire. Make of that what you will.
As for the dear old ragbag UKIP, like Mr. Carr I cannot see them ever forming a government, but while Michael Howard maintains the Conservative policy of saying one thing about Europe and doing another – in the latest instance, forcing Tory MEP’s to join the openly federalist EPP – then he is little better than a Heath or a Patten. In other words, he’s a bloody liar.
So what if the UKIP is composed of oddbals, nutballs and no-hopers? If it shakes the tree and removes some of the rotten fruit, then it has done us all a service.
Likewise, if it forces the BBC and its friends in the Europhile media to face the reality that the majority of the population of this country does not trust the EU and wants as little further involvement with it as possible, then even better.
We may not (yet) have taken to the streets with pitchforks in this country, but a vote for the UKIP sends a warning shot to the political classes that they do not have an automatic right to rule and, one glorious day, they might yet have to go and work out how to earn a proper living.
As revolutions go, this one could be fun.
Why’s it so important to safeguard sovereignty if it’s equally important not to have immigration controls? Are we voting UKIP to preserve national identity, or are we “embracing diversity” to ensure that national identity gets swamped and diluted even faster?
The UKIP is consistent. Carr’s support for the party is frivolous.
G Cooper – Oddballs and nutters make the world go round.
In modern parlance, ‘democracy’ has become a euphamism for the perpetuance of a permanent political class, devoted to conducting their mischief without hindrance, objection or opposition.
Well, that’s a bit much. Democratic politicians (whatever their inmost desires) aren’t the ones conducting their mischief without hindrance, objection or opposition. That would be the Castros, the Kim Il Jungs, the Gadhafis – in short, the dictators.
Compare and contrast life in countries with no democratic accountability with life in countries with genuine, however flawed, democratic systems, and you will see that democratic accountability exerts a very powerful influence over those who seek and wield power.
Democratic accountability of some kind is a necessary, but not sufficient condition, for liberty and prosperity. As apathetic, thick-headed, grasping, and annoying as our fellow electors are, they are merely exercising the freedom to be wrong, without which their is no real freedom at all.
I just love it when I hear people saying that UKIP are somehow anti-foreigner because they wish to preserve the existence of the country called the United Kingdom. The Tories have only themselves to blame when it comes UKIPs rise. I agree with David, it would be lovely to see them jumping the Lib-Dems and nipping at Tory rears for second place.
Oh to be a fly on the wall on Howard’s wall on Monday morning.
Well, that’s a bit much. Democratic politicians (whatever their inmost desires) aren’t the ones conducting their mischief without hindrance, objection or opposition. That would be the Castros, the Kim Il Jungs, the Gadhafis – in short, the dictators.
Well, yeah, the dictatorial baddies ARE nastier, their ‘mischiefs’ more evil. But that doesn’t mean the Powers That Be aren’t invested in preserving thier own positions of priveledge any way they can. For US examples, see Marion Berry, the crackhead mayor of DC. Dan Rostenkoski, congressman from Chicago. Mayor Daley of Chicago, or Coleman Young of Detroit…
The list goes ON.
The only REAL solution is to make name recognition work against them – when in doubt, vote out the incumbant.
Personally, I’ve often entertained the thought that ‘drafted’ government would be no worse than the shenanigans of the elected officials.
Unfortunately, that doesn’t touch the root of the evil, the self perpetuating Bureaucracy full of poeple who can only justify thier continued employment by finding new and creative ways to waste the taxes stolen from the rest of us and concurrently growing the government…
Actually, Pete of Detroit, “drafted government” is not a new idea.
Thailand, a country I find incredibly unappealing, did have a sane idea for government before the modern age (around 50 years ago, although it may be more; someone will correct me).
It’s a Buddhist country. They simply drafted in monks who had entered temples giving up all worldly possessions and ambition and not wanting any contact with anyone outside their monastery.
The monks who were drafted perceived it as their duty to serve, so they ran the country, as a sort of penance, until their term was up and they could get away back to their monastery. Their ambition was to leave government.
Interesting set-up. Hardly applies to viciously competitive politicians in the West, but Thailand seems to have been calmly and reasonably run during that time. A Samizdat may know more about this.
Thanx, Verity! The key problem (which appears to have been solved neatly in your illustration) is getting people to do a GOOD job, to the best of thier ability, w/o the “usual” compensations.
I enjoy Samizdata, including David Carr’s writing and ideas. But I do despair over the anti-democracy sentiment that seems prevalent in these pages.
There are many problems — in the US House members are basically picked in advance by GIS computers drawing the congressional districts. I certainly don’t get what I want.
But I vote every time and will continue. I donate money and march in parades and believe it makes a difference (although I realize the smallness of my personal contributions). James Carville and I agree on one t
What’s the point of voting again? It is trite but undeniable that one’s single vote will not win or lose the election. So why again does it make any difference whether or not you vote? One man’s vote makes no more difference to an election than one fan’s rooting for a sports team in front of a TV makes to the final score. At least the fans in the arena can inspire their team directly. Maybe that’s akin to participating in other ways than just voting, like rallying and contributing. But that leaves voting as a sterile delusion. Just as a fan in front of a TV has no ability to influence the outcome of a football game, the voter has no ability, by his vote alone, to influence how an election comes out. This is frustrating when one loses and falsely exhilarating when one’s side wins.
Sorry you feel that way, Robert. I’ll hazard a guess that you weren’t registered in Fla in 2000?
In 1960 there were (iirc) 5 states that were closer than 5000 votes diff b/n Kennedy and Nixon..
Hitler was a dark horse candidate that got on the ticket via comprimise, and got into the head position by PRECISELY one vote.
Closer to home, John Belushi (in ’76? ’80?) had a skit that closed “In Ann Arbor, Michigan, being caught w/ a 1/2 ounce of pot is a $5 fine. There are people still in jail who were popped with **3 SEEDS** in 1968!! Don’t tell ME your vote doesn’t count!” (seems to me that in ’94 they finally got that changed, it’s now a $25 fine)
i wonder if we could try to convince all the redneck republicans of it back here in america…
jk – continue to donate money and march in parades. Fortunately, there are millions who want to do the same to uphold their government.
But democracy’s going down the tubes in formerly democratic countries because the simple idea of people having a (big) say in the government they elect has been subverted by manipulative persons (hi, tony! hi, Peter Mandelson! Hi, all you toilers!) whose purpose is to destroy democracy while posing as its saviour.
Democracy isn’t understood in the EUSR, which is why they are so unsettled that some people are still speaking up for this “outmoded” form of government.
i wonder if we could try to convince all the redneck republicans of it back here in america…they need to quit voting as much as they do
Pete, why shouldn’t I tell you that your vote doesn’t count when it doesn’t? I don’t believe that Hitler got voted in by one vote, unless perhaps that vote was in a party conference or the Reichstag, which is quite different, being representative of thousands of individual votes. And Florida in 2000 went for Bush by over five hundred votes. Hmm. Let’s see. Is 500 more or less than one? And that was the closest vote in history. Not only that, but Bush got fewer votes than Gore overall. A few hundred thousand votes didn’t make any difference to the election, although Bush’s election was still legitimate according to the rules. The rules don’t even pretend to make one vote count.
The reason that idiotic laws like the War on Some Drugs exist is because people participate in a system that only gives them the illusion that their vote means anything. Let’s be clear. I have no hope or rational vision that this system will ever change. But let’s not fool ourselves. I hope the UKIP wins. But if I were eligible to vote for it, my vote would have no more influence on the outcome than my yelling at the TV for FSU to beat the Gators would advance the football one millimeter.
I hope in some small way, that tonight I have enema’d the entrenched political classes.
The fallacy of “your vote doesn’t count unless it was the tie-breaker” rears its ugly head.
Such simplistic thinking. I guess if you play team sports your participation doesn’t matter unless your team wins by the one goal you scored at the buzzer.
The point of mass voting isn’t that your vastly solipsistic self is the alpha and omega of the political universe, it is that mass voting is a critically necessary element in any society that hopes to retain a shred of liberty. Failing to participate in mass voting is contributing to the demise of liberty because your failure to do so undermines a pillar of free society – it is truly a civic duty.
We should have a Spartan like system where all ministers are limited to 4 year terms and immediately go on trial after leaving office.
JK:
“But I do despair over the anti-democracy sentiment that seems prevalent in these pages.”
It is hard to see democracy as a protector of our freedoms when it has spawned the leviathan that is the modern State.
The point of mass voting isn’t that your vastly solipsistic self is the alpha and omega of the political universe, it is that mass voting is a critically necessary element in any society that hopes to retain a shred of liberty. Failing to participate in mass voting is contributing to the demise of liberty because your failure to do so undermines a pillar of free society – it is truly a civic duty.
What on earth does voting have to do with liberty?
In particular, why the hell should I participate in something which exists in order to give rhetorical cover to theft?