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

Democracy doesn't mean you get your way - Part 1

Open Houses and Public Hearings:  Public Deliberation, not Delegated Decision-Making Unfortunately, and contrary to popular belief, showing up at an open house or public hearing does not mean you get to veto issues that are going forward to council. Quite often, participants in municipal consultation events are frustrated and disheartened that their feedback does not lead to obvious and explicit policy change. "But I live in the neighbourhood! I should be able to say what gets built, and what doesn't!" These sentiments are common, especially at the municipal level when rezoning applications are put forward, or communities are reviewing their Official Community Plans (OCP's) to accommodate new and different developments. Which begs the question - why bother holding open houses or public hearings at all? Making decisions democratically is not always straight forward. Once we get beyond foundational elements of a democratic society (rule of law, freedom

Why democracy doesn't mean you get your way - Part 2

If you do an online search of the word "democracy", you'll come across references to things like 'majority decision-making' or 'control by a majority'. Majority decision-making, and voting, are often assumed to be key features of a democracy. However: neither voting, nor control by a majority, are necessary for democratic decision-making. This may come as a shock, but there are ways for groups of people to make decisions that do not involve voting. Voting leaves very little room for nuance, for the exploration of alternatives, or for compromise between disparate perspectives. Majority decision-making, for its part, can lead to a tyranny of the majority, the oppression of minority perspectives, the polarization of opinions, and, by definition, a portion of participants whose preferences are ignored. So what's the alternative? If you're part of a group that is empowered to make a decision on some issue (a board, community group, committ

Including rational thought in decision-making: novel idea?

The post last week brought up the idea that we need to think about what concepts and ideas are put forward in the public realm. From pop music to sports to local community events, our approach to decision-making is influenced by commonly understood cultural practices. Meaningful democratic decision-making requires that we think about the practices, ideas, and values that percolate throughout society. More specifically, when it comes to engaging a group of people to get together and go through a democratic decision-making process, practitioners need to think about how participants are being, or have been, educated. By definition, democratic decision-making is not limited to specialists. "Rule by the people" means everyone gets to participate in decision-making, even about issues where we are not experts. This does not mean, however, that democratic decision-making should be approached from a place of ignorance.  Robert Dahl  emphasized the importance of  enlight