Please don’t vote if you’re not interested.
I don’t mean you should gorge on collective irresponsibility by saying, “my vote doesn’t count anyway;” I just mean, if you lack a firm opinion backed by personal thought and research, stay home and don’t sign a social contract before reading it, as is the habit of Congress.
Partisan organizations and newspapers, including this one, will tell you otherwise: that we need more votes so that all our voices are heard, so that nobody is left out and tossed to the side when it comes to funding and rights, so that our government springs up from the popular will of legend and not from the partisan will of present.
If you believe, however, that the political process is ignoring you, surely you already care enough to participate. And perhaps your vote will be more “centrist” or “moderating,” but you cannot uphold the virtue of centrism, or even know what centrism is, before you honestly inspect the fringes. Moreover, is a careless, uninformed vote, pressured by a vague feeling of civic duty or spurred by the passing enthusiasm of a demagogue, really going to help, or will it just dilute other, more valuable votes that have passion and knowledge behind them?
To illustrate this, Robert Bork — who was supposed to be a Supreme Court Justice at the moment — used an example similar to what follows: Suppose you are going out with four of your friends to lunch, and the choice comes down to Café Plaid or Tea Café. Suppose also that two want to go to Café Plaid and one to Tea Café, and that these factions are quite experienced with both the restaurants and are very vocal about which is better. The remaining two lack both opinion and knowledge about the restaurants. So with three votes, you are going to Café Plaid, and two people are happy, one is unhappy, and two are neutral.
But now those two abstainers feel an urge to vote. One remembers having seen some obscene scribblings about Café Plaid in a restroom stall, while the other is swayed by a shiny ad for Tea Café lying in the dirt. Neither is invested in the choice; they just want to make one for trivial reasons. Now you’re going to Tea Café, only one person is happy, two are unhappy, two are still neutral, democracy has failed.
It’s something of a silly example, and exaggerated, but you see the point. And yes, people should care, they should inform themselves, they should help steer this most powerful nation. But if you haven’t looked at the maps and plotted a course, if you haven’t gazed at the forgetful waves behind and stared out at the dour storms ahead, it is folly to whimsically tug on the wheel, stiff and heavy though it might be, not knowing if your unguided hand will itself guide the nation onto the most conspicuous and glaring rocks.
One month ago, one year ago, that was the appointed time to study not just campaign promises and roll calls, but also your preconceptions and your doubts, the scientific journals and the economic quarrels and the philosophic truths — and none of that is easy. You now have one day for a journey that a lifetime cannot finish.
Just wait this one election out, one of the many you’ll probably experience. Don’t let your well-intentioned friends yank you to the polls, and certainly don’t yank anyone along yourself. Over the next several months, regardless of how clever you think you already are, act like a student and learn something, and vote in 2012.
— Gerard Keiser, classical languages and linguistics junior
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
dabi0222 1 year, 6 months ago
The article “Do Democracy a favor-vote ‘no’ to sloppy voting” is absurd, bordering on the dangerous. The author takes a pretentious tone, giving the impression that some votes are more equal than others. The author insinuates that an “uninformed vote” only serves to dilute other, more important votes. Employing a dismally simplistic analogy about choosing where to eat, the author asserts that if you vote for “trivial reasons” democracy fails.
Since when have we gauged the value of a vote on the reasons given for the vote? Part of the reason we have secret ballots is to avoid having people such as Mr. Keiser making value-judgments on the quality of a vote. Democracy works when people vote for whatever reason they feel like voting, no matter how seemingly inconsequential the reason. Conversely, democracy fails when people are encouraged not to vote.
It is sad to see this newspaper carrying articles encouraging people not to vote, let alone the day before an election. University students notoriously abstain from voting. Giving any more encouragement to this apathy does not help and in fact hurts our democracy. The last time people were told not to vote, white southern racists prevented black citizens from participating at the polls because they’re votes were seen as “sloppy”.
This article smacks of that same elitism, giving the sense that the author’s vote is more entitled than other citizens’ votes. Droning on about guiding a ship without looking at the map, the author misses the point of our democracy. Sometimes voting for the unknown is necessary because anything appears better than the known. That was the case with the Declaration of Independence: the Founders did not know what would become of them or this nation, but they knew it was better than what British rule had to offer. Likewise, we do not always know what voting for a particular candidate or referendum will bring, but sometimes it is better than the status quo. Voting is not something you should do because some journalist has convinced you to do it. Voting is something you do out of self-interest. Self-interest isn’t always logical or researchable or informed, but it is not the role of others to pass verdicts on the quality of my self-interest. Being a citizen entitles us all to this self-interested participation. The squeaky wheel gets the oil as some say, and the squeakier we can get here in Norman, the better the future of Norman will be. Thanks for the input Mr. Keiser but I will be voting Tuesday regardless of if you think my vote is “trivial”.
SoonerDutch 1 year, 6 months ago
Do us a favor-Stop writing garbage like this.