That troublesome election

It now seems we have an election on the way. Which is being billed, by some in government, on Twitter and in some news "streeters" on TV last night,  as a bit of a bother. This is apparently because we are evolved as a nation enough to be kind of sarcastic/cool about elections, as opposed to nations we have to invade or bomb or censure at the United Nations to ensure that people have the right to vote.

That's not a throwaway line. It's worth thinking about how we keep being told that participating in the country is a nuisance.

Canada's long-form census is now voluntary, not mandatory, just like our elections. In other words, feel free to throw that census form or ballot in the garbage can, and go back to whatever you were doing before that 
intrusive question was foisted upon you. And don't forget taxes. They too are annoying, if you listen to the political noise. Parliament -- that thing you elect -- just a place where people play games. The public service -- a  burdensome obstacle.  Is there anything about the civic life of this country that stands above insults from the political class?

Now, an election is upon us, probably within days, barring some major backing-down. 

The politicians we've elected ought to stop pandering to this democracy-is-so-annoying  stuff. It's not consistent with the praise that's repeatedly (and rightly) heaped on the Canadian troops, who sacrifice much for democratic ideals. It also assumes that people, other than the soldiers, are idiots.

The fact that folks  got angry about Parliament being prorogued, about the mandatory census being scrapped, tells me that Canadian citizens are  not stupid at all, and they don't like being called lazy or uninterested. Besides, practically speaking, insulting the electorate doesn't seem to be the best way to get people's votes.  

 

Comments

[LloydG]

Right on Sue, right on!

[I. Jordan]

Hear, hear. Please, Ms. Delacourt, keep hammering this line of reasoning home. There seem to be only a few intelligent, informed and above all courageous stalwarts left in your profession who do not pander to the myth of the disinterested voter who is supposed not to care and to be merely interested in his strictly economic wellbeing. What about all of us immigrants over the decades who had no reason to doubt that we were coming to a solidly democratic country? I am one of them and am disappointed and angry as hell for having been had! I am almost ready to go back and watch the dictatorship unfold from outside.

[JoVE]

Hear Hear. Approaching elections as an annoying distractions might also contribute to the low voter turnout that will take up so much media time after the election. Lets take this thing seriously.

[Robert Edwards]

Thank you Ms. Delacourt. It's about time Canadians were called out on all the facile, superficial, pseudo-cynical twattle that passes for political discussion by many. You know it: "they're all the same, they are crooks" and so forth. We need to look deeper and wider. We need to read more history. And the media have a responsibility to assist us in this, and to not merely pander... "sigh"

[brandcowboy]

If there is to be an election, it should be because it was due, or because there is a substantive issue of confidence on the table (which, if we can use the last couple of decades of parliamentary history as a guide, there is not), not because the incumbents seem weak. Our troops aren't fighting to protect a politician's right to manufacture a crisis for the sake of his ambition. They're fighting to protect the people's right to decide what kind of society they want to live in. And the people - regardless of how irritating this may be to the chattering classes - don't want an election right now, when stability and confidence are so important to us. They want to see to the job at hand, and then when it's in our collective best interest, vote on some kind of future... for which those politicians owe us some kind of vision.

[Joseph K. Mayer]

Hi Susan,
Good post. As you no doubt know, low voter turn-out is in the interest of organized political parties. If you can alienate and drive away independent, non-aligned voters, all you are left with are "identified" voters, and then it becomes a question of which party is better at "getting out the vote", i.e., harrying identified partisan voters (who support your party) on election day, and driving them to the polls if need be. It's much easier to manage than having to communicate differing positions on issues and waiting until election night to see whose track record and policy proposals are more appealing to a majority of voters.
Yours,
Joe

[Cathy Payne]

I noticed all the groups who said ending the census was bad for evidence based governing are now the same groups who say Conservatives have a budget that is indisputable and we need no election in Canada.

Using third party endorsements that called Conservatives off base a few months ago just can't be forgotten that easily by everyone.