Skip to main content

The Problem with Voting

Voting at the polls is a cornerstone of democracy today. When we think about, and understand, democratic participation, we imagine casting some kind of vote for some kind of person or issue in some kind of election.

Unfortunately, a focus on voting narrows the possibilities for democratic participation, which is really all about shared decision-making. Don't get me wrong, voting is important. It took us about 2500 years to set up voting as an actual mechanism to make decisions, and even now it's certainly not a widespread practice. The right to vote is a contested aspiration in many corners of the world, and we should support the right of each and every person to an equal voice in community decision making.

However, an exclusive focus on voting carries a significant risk. The concept of democracy is an aspiration; an aspiration to share decision-making, and to enable each other, as equals, to participate in decision-making. Decision-making cannot always be achieved with a single transaction such as voting. Complex issues require ideas to be shared, different opinions to be heard, and judgements to be adjusted, contemplated, and refined. The best decisions are often achieved through deep collaboration. Further, to participate in decision-making in a meaningful way, we need to collect and process new ideas.

New ideas are often best explored and understood through conversation. Voting in an election does not require conversation with one another, and in fact can be done in complete isolation. An exclusive focus on democracy as voting neglects the powerful shared decision-making we see elsewhere in our communities. Think about shared community projects, volunteer-run events, joint ventures, and countless other areas where groups of people discuss and make decisions through conversations with each other as political equals. If we can think of democracy as much more than voting, countless opportunities for our communities become possible.

So let's not put all our aspirations for democracy in the voting booth - let's look for democracy elsewhere.

Where have you experienced shared decision-making? Where does this show up in your day to day life?

Comments

  1. Good post! Being engaged in community has always been the best way to vote. The 'information age' and social media has changed the size of our community, and I believe reduced the need for our very expensive political institutions. Instead of voting for a politician that is the lesser-evil every few years or so, people are now able to vote for exactly what they want whenever they want by communicating on social media. Hopefully it doesn't take 2500 years to resize (or eliminate) existing political institutes so the taxes we pay are used to better support our communities.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Who gets to decide when it comes to Community Amenity Contributions?

This week we're approaching candidates in the upcoming Vancouver municipal election to get their feedback on the city's approach to Community Amenity Contributions (CACs). The Evoke team undertook a case study and research project in this area, and believes these could be better approached. Candidate responses will be posted on this site, meanwhile, here's some background on our perspective. 
The City of Vancouver has a Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) policy, officially established in 2004 with their Financing Growth strategy, where all new development and rezoning applications contribute, financially or in-kind, to community amenities. The CACs are extracted from new development and spent upon Council approval in a number of valuable areas such as: affordable housing, child care, amenities, green spaces, community infrastructure and other public goods.
Our research focuses on a key dimension related to CACs; although they are derived from value created within a neighb…

Collaborative Governance in Action

Government: one participant amongst many

In a previous post we highlighted the need to go beyond voting for robust democratic participation. But if that's the case then the question becomes - how? Where do we create places for collaboration, discussion, and dialogue surrounding key issues facing our communities?

One possibility is to set up opportunities for collaborative governance. Now remember, governance is distinct from government; governance refers to decision-making practices and structures, and alsothe broader systems in which decisions about our communities are made. A government is a specific entity endowed with decision-making authority over something.

Collaborative governance simply refers to decision-making where multiple different organizations are involved. In these forums, governments are one of the participants amongst many, as opposed to being the sole arbiter over final decisions. Decision-making takes place between both state and non-state entities, and authori…

Does an efficient public service destroy community accountability?

New Public Management is an approach to running public service organizations (government services), and civil service generally, focused on service delivery that is efficient, business-like, and that incorporates market based principles. It includes management techniques and practices drawn from the private sector, allowing public servants to contract out services through competitive contracting, and focused on the professionalized delivery of public services.

The problem is...this approach may result in a loss to democratic accountability.

In a previous post we outlined two key dimensions to accountability; 1) understanding and monitoring decisions that are made, and 2) access to trustworthy information. Public administration, and the notion of public service, was traditionally focused on accountability to constituents via centralized control, and reporting to, defined government ministries and departments. This model is far from perfect; centralized bureaucracies are problematic in …