Why vote? Do good, is good, feels good...

Why vote?
While I will try to give my comments and opinions on the actual candidates and policies in this election, now that it is only starting to get underway is probably a good time to discuss voting in general, before things get clouded in the conflict of campaigning. While I hope to remain impartial, realistically this is probably going to be the
only completely (or at least the most) unbiased article I write.


Why bother voting?
For all the media reports of fired up conservatives, the Tea Party, and even the Occupy movement, probably the most serious political issue the US (and every other country) faces is voter apathy.  For the US, the stats seem to be (source http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781453.html) about 37% turnout in congressional elections and 50-55% in presidential elections. While a lot was made about George Bush not winning the 'popular' vote in 2000, more relevant is that even if a candidate does gain the magic 50% of votes cast, it still means more than 70% of eligible voters did not choose them. A political system where 30% decide the government sounds terrible, but this is par for the course in Western countries, and actually on the high side (even with his 'landslide' 2001 victory in the UK, Tony Blair only received endorsement from 25% of the voting population). There are probably many complicated reasons for this, but without trying to explain why people don't vote, here I would like to make some comments on why they should -  practically, morally, and psychologically.


Practical reasons
One common pseudo-philosophical reason for not voting is that in a population of millions, the individual's vote makes no tangible difference, so why bother. Apart from the rare, but real, cases of elections coming down to small numbers of votes (think Florida 2000) this is still philosophically bogus. There is a difference between something making an imperceptible difference, and making no difference, and we accept this in many areas,daily, in our life. Not brushing my teeth today is not going to give me cavities, but I still do it because I know that every little action adds up, and, since tomorrow I will face the same choice, there is no rational way to not do it now and yet still do it enough times that it matters. Admittedly an election is slightly different in that it's a 'one-shot' event, but logically the position is the same. Or perhaps the example of littering illustrates it better: we (hopefully) don't litter not because we worry that our particular sweet wrapper will ruin the landscape but because we know what would happen if everyone did it. It's a valid rule of action, and of course isn't overpoweringly persuasive, but then nothing is,(except perhaps pulling a lever rigged directly to our brain's pleasure circuits). Furthermore there is also our influence on others, and on popular mood. Not voting itself, and even more so arguing that it doesn't matter anyway, has an affect on others, until eventually it actually does have a directly perceptible effect. Kicking one stone down a mountain can start a landslide, and the same dynamics can apply to people as well.
Though in my view, for all the claims to rational reasoning, people actually resort to this line to justify the fact that they couldn't be bothered voting anyway. It's an excuse, not an argument, and should be discounted as such.


Moral Reasons
Another familiar excuse is that the polticians are 'all the same' and 'each as bad as the other', and while someone would like to vote, there is no one worth voting for. This often seems like a fair point, but what Churchill said about democracy in general (that it is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried) applies to particular elections as well: we might just end up with a bad candidate, but the point is that they are better than all the others. And anyway, in most modern elections, this 'best of a bad lot' logic doesn't really apply, since there are plenty of radical and outright 'nasty' individuals running for office, which makes lumping all politicians together willfully unfair. There might indeed be widespread cronyism, self-aggrandisement and even corruption, but there is also racism, xenophobia and many other hateful attitudes eager to take power, and one less vote for anyone works out as one less vote that these elements need to have influence. If you can't be motivated to vote for someone, then view it at least as voting against something, since as has been often said, all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. As an extreme example of this one can look at the 1933 German elections; although Hitler never achieved a majority, his 44% of the vote allowed him to begin to consolidate power, and yet was derived from only 31% of eligible voters. One third of the German electorate was all that it was needed to set the world on a course for horrific war, and although the Nazis used many tricks to bypass the democratic system (the vote was just one part of it), it still shows how low support is no barrier to power.
Not voting at all is not doing nothing, it's approving all parties equally, and it's important to recognize this; like the 'landslide' example effect, just as we have to take responsibility for the small actions that can have large effects, so we are responsible for small non-actions.


An unfortunate corrolary to this is that it is the people who are most fired up about issues that vote most, and sadly it is the issues which affect others, the 'moral' issues, which get people most fired up. The ultra conservatives in America presumably aren't vociferious on the issue of gay rights or abortion because they want to be prevented from gay marriages or having an abortion themselves, but because they don't want others to. And so (whether you agree or disagree with them) standing by and washing one's hands of the electoral process one is yielding the power to these people to disproportionately influence the state and impose their views perhaps unfairly on others, normally a minority, and that is an abrogation of moral responsibility.


Similarly people are less motivated to vote when things are going well, but it should always be remembered (and not so hard to do so currently at least) how even in the developed West it's not always plain sailing, and if we're asleep at the wheel, things can easily change, for the worse. There are numerous examples of relative success being derailed in a short term by incompetent government, with Zimbabwe being a classic, if extreme, example. Nor do we need to look at developing countries to see how policies have long lasting effects; for example my interpretation of the ongoing relatively dismal state of the UK transport and health services is in large part due to the anti-state service ideology of Margret Thatcher. Never underestimate the power of a government to set a country on a road to ruin.


Psychological Reasons
Finally there are I believe important psychological benefits to voting, which may seem surpising to some people. The most fundamental of these is it is active participation in one's society, fostering a sense of belonging in a community, which many studies have shown to be an integral part of our well being. Helping to choose how society is run reinforces the idea that there is indeed (contra Thatcher) a society at all, and feeling part of it is beneficial.


Furthermore, by contemplating and reacting to the political issues, one is involving oneself in the current status of the state, and this will influence and inform one's day to day actions. It gives you the bigger picture, which can often help understand the particular problems in everyday life. One example might be the various side effects of the economic crisis, which are often not as black and white as one might expect.For instance, seeing one's mortgage go up on it's own is always going to be annoying, but if one understands it as part of a bigger picture (cooling an economy and hence a sign of underlying and continuing prosperity) then one may be able to appreciate the reasons, and if not be happy about it at least be able to view it more sanguinely as part of an overall good thing.
And of course by participating in an election one hopefully educates oneself in matters that penetrate the prime facie hype, and this can also be beneficial. So for example, If one doesn't look into the issue, then one might assume (as most people do) that crime is on the rise, when in fact statistics often show it is falling, and only perception is rising, and this should help prevent against irrational fear and worry.


Finally, these points apply whether one's favourite candidate wins or loses, since it is participation that matters most, and as long as no ultra-extreme candidate takes power (and by voting you help prevent that) then following the election process should (hopefully) give a more balanced and informed view about the opposition as well, and hence if they do win, then you might realise they are not as bad as you once thought.


Join society, join the vote.