Is Democracy a Waste of Time?

BACKTALK--This is a reply to Joe Mathews' CityWatch article of Oct. 6, "Local Politics Is a Waste of Time." 

First, I want to be clear about what I'm replying to.  Mathews quotes an article reporting on a poll that showed California voters' disenchantment with their local elected officials.  He then summarizes the article's proposed theory as "disgust at national politics bleeding into local".

He contrasts that with what is apparently his own theory: "that the skeptics about local political involvement are right to stay away".  He makes his case via the following points: 

● Local governments have little power and discretion in our highly centralized and regulated state

● We discourage political engagement at the local level by requiring local elections to be nonpartisan, thus keeping out political parties, the chief way human beings engage in politics.

● And the few decisions left to local governments are virtually always determined by the interests with money – developers and public employees.

● Those who engage inevitably have to deal with online nastiness and personal attacks.

(By "politics", both the quoted study and Mathews seem to refer specifically to political campaigns and voting.)

I do understand the feeling of alienation and despair; I've been there myself.  However...

While I disagree with his arguments in favor of his theory, their importance pales in contrast to my major concern about what he proposes: giving in to apathy and abandoning our roles as citizens of a democracy.

In an extreme scenario, suppose he's right, and all California voters decide to stay away from all elections.  What happens next?  Will the California and local governments cease to exist?  Not likely -- what will cease to exist is any semblance of democracy.  Government will continue, but it will take place entirely without the "consent of the governed", who can't be bothered to demand or exercise their rights.  Is this what Mr. Mathews wants?  Is it what any of us want?  

When we the people give up without a fight, or even bothering to show up, we'll probably get the government we deserve.  There have been plenty of examples to show us what that could be like.

No, the proper solution to a poor democracy isn't no democracy -- it's more and better democracy; more people involved, and more deeply. When we have local election turnouts well below 20%, when most citizens don't know (or care?) who their elected officials are, or what they do, or how to find out, when even those who vote typically don't keep track of the actions of those they elected, what sort of government should we expect?

To clarify: by "democracy" I don't mean something as simplistic as "majority rule", but something like an ongoing, shifting dialogue among engaged citizens, involving many more than just two points of view, and not just confined to election campaigns -- elected officials can be held to account at any time.  Democracy, as I see it, can't be reduced to a series of independent political "transactions".

{module [1177]}

Imagine this scenario: 

● People regularly give up, say, 6 hours/week of TV entertainment or facebooking to gather together and learn what's going on in local government, who's who and what are they doing. (Neighborhood Councils can provide convenient gathering places and focusing mechanisms for local involvement.)

● Local election turnouts regularly run well upward of 60%

● People keep track of what's going on between elections; for example, officials who try to sneak bad decisions through, or give away common wealth to private interests, are regularly exposed and called to account by a mass of angry citizens.

Do you suppose, just maybe, our local governments might run better, be more responsive and worth getting involved in?

Is this just an unattainable fantasy?  Not necessarily; I explored this possibility a while ago, in a CityWatch article called "If We Want a Better Democracy …".  Could such a proposal work?  Would it be worth trying?  

To expand a bit on an aside in that article: Do you have something better to do with the rest of your life than saving democracy … from creeping dictatorship, for you and your children and their children?  

It really is that stark a choice: give up and endure the consequences; or pay the price in time, effort, care, and intensity, and repair the process of democracy.  

Maybe Joe Mathews doesn't care (and I hope I've misunderstood him), but I do care; do you?

 

(Don Dwiggins is Second Vice President of the Northridge East Neighborhood Council, a long-time community activist and an occasional contributor to CityWatch.)

-cw

 

 

CityWatch

Vol 13 Issue 82

Pub: Oct 9, 2015