Failures of modern implementations of democracy: "your vote counts"
I was thinking this morning of an email I received from my local state party machinery: it was a request for help in a district having an off-cycle election for a vacant seat in the state Legislature. I realized that there is a flaw in current perceptions of democracy in the United States--the perception that "your vote counts."
Implicit in this email is that if you volunteer your time now, you can defeat an "opposing" party's candidate for office. The email, of course, went out to the entire state, so many volunteers who might answer the call are likely not even from the district holding the election. And those volunteers could shift the outcome in an election in which officially they have no voice. Further, the voice of some of the participants (e.g., those who might vote for the "opposing" party) would be diluted by their activity.
And that's the flaw. If all you do is vote, you have already ceded power to the machinery. All of those volunteers (from other districts, no less) are "voting" through their activism, well in advance of the actual voting day itself. And how does one find out about all of these thousand ways to do more than vote? What if I were not on my party's mailing list--would have lost an opportunity to participate in this "extra-democratic" process? "Your vote counts" is a myth.
Beyond this simple email, I recall the process for electing a governor in my state. What I did not realize, had it not been for my neighbor, is that the process for choosing a governor starts many months ahead of time with caucuses in the individual wards within the state. A ward in an urban setting is an area several blocks in size defined as a unit for voting purposes. The caucuses are not well announced, are only attended by those who are active or within the communications reach of the state party. The purpose of the caucus is selection of delegates to the state's convention several months later. Even before you have arrived at a caucus, the major candidates have identified a slate of proposed delegates, with local organizers encouraging participants to vote for entire slates of delegates, rather than evaluate each delegates ability to represent your voice.
Again, this was evidence that your vote doesn't really count, because all of this work was happening many months in advance of the actual election day. And not everyone is aware that these caucuses are happening until it's over and the local press trumpets the results. Further, the sheer scale of the operation required by the state party machinery to influence outcomes in every ward demonstrate that your own voice, your own vote, has little chance of being heard on its own. The best you can do is choose the faction most closely aligned to your own goals and interests, and hope that you chose well. The massive aggregation of interest dilutes the impact of any single voice to near-zero.
"Your vote counts?" Sure, but not for you. Not in a system where activities other than voting pre-dominate, and are only available to a select few. Not in a system that
dilutes individual voices in favor of factions, discouraging a voter from participating at all.
Find a new way to choose.
Implicit in this email is that if you volunteer your time now, you can defeat an "opposing" party's candidate for office. The email, of course, went out to the entire state, so many volunteers who might answer the call are likely not even from the district holding the election. And those volunteers could shift the outcome in an election in which officially they have no voice. Further, the voice of some of the participants (e.g., those who might vote for the "opposing" party) would be diluted by their activity.
And that's the flaw. If all you do is vote, you have already ceded power to the machinery. All of those volunteers (from other districts, no less) are "voting" through their activism, well in advance of the actual voting day itself. And how does one find out about all of these thousand ways to do more than vote? What if I were not on my party's mailing list--would have lost an opportunity to participate in this "extra-democratic" process? "Your vote counts" is a myth.
Beyond this simple email, I recall the process for electing a governor in my state. What I did not realize, had it not been for my neighbor, is that the process for choosing a governor starts many months ahead of time with caucuses in the individual wards within the state. A ward in an urban setting is an area several blocks in size defined as a unit for voting purposes. The caucuses are not well announced, are only attended by those who are active or within the communications reach of the state party. The purpose of the caucus is selection of delegates to the state's convention several months later. Even before you have arrived at a caucus, the major candidates have identified a slate of proposed delegates, with local organizers encouraging participants to vote for entire slates of delegates, rather than evaluate each delegates ability to represent your voice.
Again, this was evidence that your vote doesn't really count, because all of this work was happening many months in advance of the actual election day. And not everyone is aware that these caucuses are happening until it's over and the local press trumpets the results. Further, the sheer scale of the operation required by the state party machinery to influence outcomes in every ward demonstrate that your own voice, your own vote, has little chance of being heard on its own. The best you can do is choose the faction most closely aligned to your own goals and interests, and hope that you chose well. The massive aggregation of interest dilutes the impact of any single voice to near-zero.
"Your vote counts?" Sure, but not for you. Not in a system where activities other than voting pre-dominate, and are only available to a select few. Not in a system that
dilutes individual voices in favor of factions, discouraging a voter from participating at all.
Find a new way to choose.
