Democracy in crisis

Ben Wildsmith

The upcoming presidential election in the USA comes at the end of a turbulent year for democracy.

From India to France, Germany, and the UK, elections have raised concerns about the health of the process and whether it is producing results that reflect the true will of the electorate.

The low turnout in the UK, along with a particularly distorted result from the first-past-the-post system has seen Labour achieve a majority that seems to outweigh enthusiasm for the incoming government.

In France, meanwhile, President Macron has lent credence to accusations of regal inclinations by ignoring the electorate altogether and installing Carry On Brexit’s Michel Barnier as his Prime Minister.

All of these elections have been conducted amidst fear that extremism might take hold. In the case of India, a surprise lukewarm endorsement of Narender Modhi prevented what was beginning to look like autocracy from going any further.

Benefit

In the UK, Reform UK’s systemic disadvantage is being touted as a benefit of first-past-the-post, as if leaving views unrepresented will make them go away.

Here in Wales, our adoption of a closed list version of proportional representation seems certain to damage calls for PR in the wider UK. If the exotic creatures that represent us didn’t seem detached enough, they’ll now be unveiled after the election like a particularly unsettling episode of The Masked Singer.

‘Just put a cross next to the colour you like, there’s a good voter.’

Much of life that was once under democratic control has passed into private administration. Services like Royal Mail have found themselves in direct competition with the Premier League of capitalism, scrambling to remain relevant as Amazon delivers everything to everyone yesterday.

The customer experience of people as citizens is a shambles in comparison with the efficiency they receive from corporations. As the state has been starved, the private sector is ever ready to lend its energy to government failings.

If we all became shareholders in a government run by Apple, would the sky fall? Is a gerrymandered, incompetent government too high a price to pay for nominal input into its decisions?

Most people still think so, I hope, but democracy being a thing is not a given.

US Presidential race

Both candidates in the US Presidential race are claiming that the other will bring democracy to an end.

Once people can make that threat and be taken seriously, then the conditions are already in place for the continuance of democracy to be up for debate.

The merest suggestion of it would have been taboo ten years ago, now presidential candidates are lobbing it like a brick through the Overton window.

American politics is, of course, at an extremely low ebb. The final weeks of the campaign will be marked by dire warnings of what might happen if the other side wins. The central problem is that everybody made their minds up months, if not years, ago.

Neither candidate is attempting to persuade undecided voters, because there are too few of them to be statistically relevant. Their campaigns are solely focussed on motivating supporters to go out and vote. So, with each side exclusively talking to people who already support them, there is no persuasive appeal to the nation at all.

Whoever wins will have made an enemy of half the country.

Participation

If we value democracy, we should insist on participation. Every technological means should be available to make voting as easy as possible. General elections should be public holidays with festive events and constant reminders to get your vote in. Kids should vote along with adults, their votes counting when they reach 16.

Personally, I feel voting should be compulsory. We are obliged to educate our children, pay taxes, insure our cars and a host of other intrusive, government-mandated responsibilities.

Nobody should be unheard, and if they want to spoil their ballot paper, that’s a valid democratic act. If the entire electorate were voting, then candidates would be obliged to persuade, rather than rely on a radicalised minority to prevail.

Things have a tendency of evaporating from society. You turn around twice, and all the pubs have gone, or cash machines. Democracy could go like that; people could just lose interest.

We should talk about it more.