Don't Vote - It Encourages the Sods

In a post headed “Division3 as an indicator of the sentiment”, Lin Hall at Cedar Grove View (link in the right hand column) was concerned about non-voters in the recent council election and the likelihood that Logan councillors would decide not to chase the non-voters down. He says:

“Will the justification for allowing transgressors of the law to get away with their sins be that the economical situation demands that the ratepayers are not burdened with the frivolity of chasing down these non-voters and bringing them to task? Or will the councilors find another way of saying that it is just a frivolous law that we are not going to enforce? That means that councilors are so powerful in their position that (they) can decide not to enforce a law that everyone, without exception, has to abide by. Is this the sort of corruption that you are willing to allow councilors to enact on your behalf?”

Obviously Lin has a good point, a law is a law not a multiple-choice option. That said many believe that the idea of councilors as guardians of the law chasing up transgressors is a little like foxes chasing up the chooks or perhaps setting a thief to catch a thief. Let’s face it, politicians and their poor relations, local councilors, have got to be among the least trusted groups in Australian society. Some of us vote for them but do so without great enthusiasm. Like wiping your arse, it’s just something that has to be done. We know that most of the sods will let us down badly. We know that most of them are in it for themselves. We know that most of them think we are a mob of mindless arseholes that deserve to be fleeced. It’s no wonder that many potential voters will just shun the whole process.

I remember an election in the UK where voting is not compulsory and the turnout was about 30%. The next day the papers were full of speculation about the low turnout. Eventually it was decided that it wasn’t because the voters were lazy or because they weren’t doing their civic duty, it was because they were totally pissed off with politicians generally and were turning their backs. This is about the only effective protest that voters have. If you win in an election like that, you know you don’t truly represent anything. If you have lost in an election like that, you curse yourself because you might have got in if you had just raised your game. It can be a very effective protest.

And there is a lot to protest in the political world and not just in our part of the globe. Look at the expenses scandal in the UK including this choice information from the ABC news website:

Britain's 646 legislators (MP’s) receive an annual salary of almost 65,000 pounds ($131,500) and claimed 93 million pounds in expenses last year, an average of 144,000 pounds ($285,000) each.

Notice their basic pay isn’t much more than our Logan councilors screw and the cost of living is much higher in the UK. Wonder what the Logan expenses are?

And look at the double shuffling dance that Obama is now doing after he was voted in as the new great hope for mankind. Many of his honorable intentions have been well and truly fucked by the reality of dealing with the scummy swamps of practical politics where you are obliged to please many people you wouldn’t want to touch outside of a biohazard suit.

However, I have always voted because it is the law. I am obliged to turn up. But that didn’t stop me from once drawing a new box on my voting slip and voting for John Cleese. It was my protest vote. John Cleese didn’t get in.