Modern Democracies – WHY VOTE?

It is good to have my feelings about politicians supported by an august journal such as the New York Times - I thought my one loyal reader might be interested in the following quote from the NYT:- 
 
"The Worst Voter Turnout in 72 Years

 Turnout this month was the lowest in any federal election since 1942.

Showing up at the polls is the best way to counter the oversized influence of wealthy special interests, who dominate politics as never before. But to encourage participation, politicians need to stop suppressing the vote, make the process of voting as easy as possible, and run campaigns that stand for something.

Over all, the national turnout was 36.3 percent; only the 1942 federal election had a lower participation rate at 33.9 percent. The reasons are apathy, anger and frustration at the relentlessly negative tone of the campaigns.

During the same period, negative campaigning has become ubiquitous in the United States and elsewhere and has been shown to impact voter turnout. Attack ads and smear campaigns give voters a negative impression of the entire political process.”

The sentiments expressed above fit very well with my thoughts and feelings regarding the 2013 Australian General Election. The only difference is that in Australia there is that odd “democratic” law that voting is compulsory (and people are fined for NOT voting). But informal votes – “invalid” votes - have increased from 2.1% in 1983 to 5.9% in 2013 (approx. 940 000 voters out of a total of approx. 15.9 million on the electoral roll).

The NYT editorial’s comments about running campaigns that mean something and voters “apathy, anger and frustration at the relentlessly negative campaigns” certainly resonates with me. Even with Australia’s “compulsory democracy” the actual voter turnout for the 2013 election was only about 81% and even lower if the 1 million odd Australians living overseas who did not bother to vote (or were not even on the electoral roll) are taken into account.

As in the USA there has to be a reason for this low turnout and I suggest that “disenchantment” with politicians is the prime cause – lack of trust and because politicians lie. They say one thing (“read my lips”) before an election but then promptly ignore this and do something which was not voted for.

Politicians need to treat voters as human beings with hopes and aspirations and not merely as an inconvenient, if necessary, means to get elected and politicians need to give voters something relevant to actually vote for - then see the voter engagement improve!!

Why whistleblowers are so important

To my way of thinking whistleblowers need to be encouraged. If someone is guilty of corrupt, illicit, negligent, abusive or exploitative activities they need to be brought to account for their actions. If a person is not brought to account then they will forever be looking over their shoulder wondering when they will be found out and when the axe will fall. They will carry a burden of guilt which will weigh heavily upon them, leading to increasing stress and isolation from their fellow beings. No one who exploits others in any way feels comfortable and at ease in the company of those they have hurt or negatively affected – this is a natural consequence of guilt. As the French mathematician and humanist, Blaise Pascal (1623-1662) wrote in his ‘Pensees’, “There is no greater unhappiness than when a person starts to fear the truth lest it denounce him.”

This is the reason why whistleblowers often fear for their lives. They have ‘exposed’ someone’s deepest secrets that they never expected would see the light of day – secrets that are dark and were hidden. Such exposure presents the perpetrator with an image of themselves which differs from their own, internal, picture of whom or what they think they are – everyone likes to think of themselves as a ‘good person’. When someone is caught out and exposed by a whistleblower they are forced to see themselves, as it were, in their ‘true colours’ and they are shocked and enter a state of denial and their inevitable initial response is “I have done nothing wrong”.

They will fight tooth and nail to preserve their image of themselves and to avoid appearing diminished in their own eyes or in the eyes of others. They try to pass the blame to others or to accuse the whistleblower of being untrustworthy and of lying. They fight to maintain a level of trust because everyone, particularly in business or government, must be seen as trustworthy. All worthwhile relationships are built on trust. If a person knows (deep down and because of their actions) that they are not trust worthy, they will not trust others either. Not to trust anyone is to have no meaningful relationships, which in turn isolates them from others. It must never be forgotten, however, that Man, as in Mankind, is a highly social being and is unable to live successfully or for long without some social contact, which is why the most severe punishment that can be imposed on anyone is solitary confinement (think of the self-imposed isolation by the North Korean government and the effect this has had on the unfortunate people of that impoverished country or the Chinese government’s persecution of dissidents and members of the Falun Gong).

To expose a person’s (or a government’s or businesses’) corrupt, illegal or exploitative activities is necessary, not only for society but also for those individuals engaged in such activities. It is as if something secret and unseen has now seen the light of day, which has a cathartic effect by lifting a burden and ‘cleansing’ a person (or organisation) of their guilt. The alternative is fear, and fear begets anger and hatred, and those who are fearful and consumed by hate lose their powers of reason and in such a state seldom exercise sound judgement. A person’s ability to determine ‘right’ from ‘wrong’ is suspended and everything and anything is considered acceptable, which defers the moment of exposure. Again think of North Korea; also BP and their problems in the Gulf; the Chinese government and dispossessed landowners; the Catholic Church and their paedophile priests; the Australian regulatory authorities and highly toxic pesticides banned elsewhere but still used in Australia and so the list goes on. Consider also the many other less than charitable activities exposed by that very useful website at http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Wikileaks.

What cannot be forgotten in today’s unedifying stampede for money and positions of influence is that men (as in mankind) have done these things and that we are all of mankind, furthermore we all share in the multi-various proclivities of mankind. Even if, from a purely legal stand point, any one individual may not be an accessory to any particular questionable activity or behaviour, because of our human nature and the consciousness that binds us all to each other, we are all guilty – we are all of mankind. We are all diminished by such unwarranted behaviour. This is why whistleblowers are so important.

“All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing.”
Edmund Burke (British Statesman and Philosopher, 1729-1797)

Our ego and us

We all know an Autocrat, the ‘controller’. We all know a person who is always right, who knows everything, who has an opinion on everything and who’s way of doing things is always the best and only way. But I wonder if such a person is ever at peace within him/her self? To be constantly aware of what others are doing – so that they may be corrected, because you are sure they will inevitably do something wrong – must be very tiring. It must wear the person down.

There will never be peace, anywhere, until people have ‘peaceful’ minds and ‘peaceful’ thoughts. How can it be otherwise? Peace will never eventuate from warlike and violent thoughts or actions. Look, I don’t just mean international peace. I include in this term peace from ALL violence – domestic, civil, social, sectarian and international and I would include in this our predilection to anger when crossed or thwarted. We are all of us guilty of this one at times.

I know that it would be naive to believe that there will ever be a time when everyone has ‘peaceful’ thoughts – it will never happen, the human condition being what it is. But why should we accept this deplorable state of affairs? Why SHOULD there be violence; why SHOULD there be so much anger? What is the purpose and what does it serve? So what if we are thwarted in our endeavours; so what if others don’t have the same goals in life as we do – why get angry or violent about it? I do not believe that there can ever be any ‘benefit’ from anger or from violence – that these two are a complete waste of time and energy, both of which would be better spent elsewhere.

Is it possible for most of us to have peaceful thoughts? I am sure it is.

It maybe that there is a ‘tipping point’ such that when the majority of people have ‘peaceful’ thoughts then there is more likely to be peace than otherwise (which is logical I suppose - and somewhat of a blinding glimpse of the obvious). So what does it say about the general thought content of the average person that there is so much violence and lack of ‘peace’ in the world? It would appear, that as a world, we are some distance away from that ‘tipping point’!!

Anger I believe arises from our egos. When our ego (our idea of who we are) tells us that it has been diminished in some way – that we have been shown up as a lesser person than our ego allows for – then anger may arise. A very typical example is road rage – say someone cuts in a queue of cars and immediately pushes us one vehicle further from the ‘feeder’ arrow at the intersection. Our immediate reaction is to think “Who does she think she is pushing in like that? I am just as important as she is – bloody female driver!” (Or whoever – I am NOT anti-female please believe me!). Anger arises and we activate the horn in no uncertain manner and also give the finger and generally show that we are extremely displeased.

Can you relate to this? But does it really matter? Maybe the woman is an unemployed single mother who has an urgent appointment to meet with a potential new employer – a reasonable enough excuse, don’t you think? But no! Our ego tells us that it has been diminished and slighted and that this slight must be redressed in some way. Less than charitable thoughts arise and anger and violence, that inevitably accompany such thoughts, always intervene and turn a tricky situation into a possibly violent one. All for what – just to please the ego?

In a perverse way lack of peace may be considered as a positive! Having an ‘unpeaceful’ mind may lead someone to re-appraise their perceptions and ideas which may lead to innovations in human relations or helping those less fortunate or in medicine or to innovations in any field of human endeavour.

There is always a positive to be found somewhere – even when the ego is involved!