Deliberations

A state election in Victoria, Australia is imminent. Each day the television news hour includes footage of the Labor incumbent pretending not to be in campaign mode, and the opposition leader being critical of current Government policy. The media depicts it as a contest between the leaders of the Labor and Liberal parties. Of course I'm voting for neither of them, I'm voting for a local representative. If I wasn't involved myself in local issues, I'd know little about these people or what they stand for beyond their party ideologies. Since we must vote by law, and our system is fully preferential, the distribution of How to Vote cards is indispensable. Critical analysis is entirely optional.

In the past few weeks, I've also voted in three other elections. First, my automobile club wants its members to elect board members. We get a three-line bio on each, which gives me nothing to go on. I have no idea about the boardroom battles that have recently been fought, or what real difficulties the organisation faces. I select an incumbent who also belongs to a bicycle advocacy group, and newie who has and engineering background. These are the two who are left after I've rejected the real estate tycoon, the career board member members, and others who don't provide any qualifications at all. In other words, I have no idea who to vote for.

Then I get a ballot for the Senate at my university. Some candidates provide a long list of current affiliations. These are the intellectual and cultural elites of Australia. Some are well-known alumni. But I know absolutely nothing about how these people view the university. Do they care that it's turned into an undergraduate degree factory for foreign students, like most campuses in Australia? What do they think about the Government squashing student "unionism" (nothing of the sort). I set the ballot aside. A few days later, I'm on Facebook, and see an advert for one of the candidates. Seems that a few have banded together as a working group, stating progressive aims in common. Nice work, so I vote for them all, and send the candidate a good luck email. He is very appreciative.

Today I received a ballot from a public company of which I am a shareholder, to re-appoint their directors. There are no alternatives. But their constitution demands that they send out the ballots anyway. Their share price plummeted after the GFC, but now it's climbed back to within 10% of its previous high. I don't think that has anything to do with management, but they take the credit. Since most of the shares are institutionally-held, who will assign their votes to the Managing Director by proxy, the vote is a complete waste of time. I chuck the ballot in the bin.

So all of this is just sham democracy. We are given the illusion that we are making choices. But these people are just chimeras on our horizon, unknowable and unaccountable to us after their election. The voting procedure actually serves to protect the distance between us and the institution, and we buy it. I am sure that the brass of most institutions are quite happy for the ballots to be completely ignored, contenting us to the meagre opportunity offered.

Maybe one day I'll receive an invitation to contribute to some real decision-making by those institutions. To complete a prioritisation survey at a minimum, or ideally to be selected to deliberate about an issue. Now that would be a worthwhile expression of democracy.

Then I'd have a very, very good reason to vote for the leader who championed that engagement.