Politicians are all the same! How apathetic Britain is paving the way for a new fascist state

Election time is approaching and once again the pollsters and press are predicting a record low in the voter turnout. In the last British general election, it only took 25% of the eligible voting population to elect the Labour Party into power. This year, it maybe that only a fifth of this population, by making it to the polling booth and agreeing on who to elect, effectively decide the future of the UK over the next four years. If the trend continues, then parties such as the British National Party can look forward to more and more political representatives. That's because as the number of voters decreases, so the relative impact of a minority political groups with a sustainable core support increases.

This brings us to the question of why people don't vote? When asked to explain why they don't vote on TV, non-voters produce a similar message. Politicians are all corrupt. All they do is lie. All they want is power. They don't care about the people, they only care about themselves. And the final nail in the coffin, 'at the end of the day, it doesn't matter who I vote for, it's not going to change anything, they're all the same'. A common theme to all these reasons for not voting is the idea that politicians are a different type of animal to the rest of us. They are, at heart, power seekers, corrupt to the core and inveterate liars. But are politicians really the only ones who seek power? Who doesn't want some kind of power or influence, whether that be at work, in religious organisations, or with our friends and families. We're all constantly seeking power - its how we do it, not that we're doing it, that is the issue. Evidently, in their bid for power, some politicians are on occasion corrupt. And many lie from time to time. But this should not come as a shock. Corruption happens in all walks of life. Think about all the organisations that you've ever worked for. Were they completely clean of underhand dealings? Did everyone always follow the rules? Did anyone ever try and appropriate the organisation's property for him or herself? Some cash, a bit of stock, the use of a computer, the company van, a few pens. Furthermore, the idea that politicians lie anymore than your average manager or window cleaner or housewife or eighteen year old is unproven and unlikely to be true. Lying, like corruption is part of everyday life. We all do it, all the time, to avoid confrontations, to get our way and to cover up for our sins. Some politicians are corrupt, that's true, and they do lie, but in so doing they reflect the culture from which they are drawn. Furthermore, the fact that as a politician, you can be corrupt or straight, is all the more reason to vote, rather than abstain. The whole point of the vote is that politicians are not entitled to take power for themselves - instead their taking of power - depends on the support of others - a majority. The system is designed so that politicians, in depending on the support of others, are forced into listening to the views of others, and exercising power in a way that is consistent with their supporters' desires. The others, the voters, of whom politicians form a part, are there to weed out the bad politicians from the good. If you don't vote you can't do that.

Of all the claims that are made of politicians, the one that is most erroneous, and indeed the most dangerous, is the idea that politicians are all the same. There is a range of political parties on offer at the general election, offering different political programmes. For example, the Green Party if elected would get rid of nuclear weapons and devolve decision-making power rather than centralise it. These policies would radically change the face of the UK, weakening our defensive capabilities and the power of the state. The Conservatives are ideologically inclined towards privatising health care. Any privatisation policies made in health would radically change peoples' lives, especially the poor, who would have no access to health care. The Liberal Democrats would not have gone to war with Iraq, which would have had a massive impact on the international image of this country, as well as saving lives, and saving the country billions of pounds in savings. There are a number of socialist parties wanting to re-nationalise the electricity and water industries - and increase tax rates to increase the quality of social service provision to the poor. The poor might benefit from this policy change, but the rich and middle classes would suffer, at least in the short-term. And any British Muslim thinking that it is not worth voting, because a BNP government would not be much different to a New Labour one, would find themselves in for a shock, if the former were to be elected to power. Taking it further a field, and back in time, how many German Jews in early 1940s Germany would agree that politicians are all the same?

Votes do count. In the UK, what happens is that each person has one vote - and is enabled to cast that vote for the candidate of his choice, from a list of candidates who have gained a basic minimum level of support, within a local area (called constituency). Each vote has equal value. Once all the votes have been casted, the votes are counted and the candidate who receives the most is the winner. He or she then gets to represent his or her region in the House of Commons. Votes count so much that political parties spend millions of pounds and hours on trying to convince people to vote for them.

So if it is painfully obvious (see Nazi Germany for more detail about the pain) that not all politicians are the same then why do people say that they are? If it is equally as obvious that votes do count, then why do people say they don't? There are a number of reasons. The first one is that those people who use this argument are inherently stupid. They are really dumb. They've really got it seriously wrong. So wrong that it hurts the head to contemplate it. So wrong that if they weren't holding down jobs you'd want to give them applications forms for disability benefit. There are some really stupid people in this country - who have bought into this perspective. By marginalising themselves from the political process - they have ensured that they don't count. However it would be too easy and overly simplistic to assume that so called voter apathy is solely a result of ignorance.

A second reason why people don't vote is that they're free-riding. Free-riders more or less enjoy their lives under the government of the day. When it comes to vote, they make the simple calculation, that the likelihood of things being any different, or being radically different following the general election, is low. Were it to be high, then they would probably get up and walk down to the local school and pop the ballot paper in. They have made a rational decision, that things are not bad enough, or likely to be bad enough following the election, for them to want to try and change things through voting. Britain has become a lazy bunch of obese couch potatoes, bought up to believe that if something doesn't please their stomach or erogenous zones, then it really isn't worth bothering about. Expending energy on politics is a bit too painful. By relying on others, the free-riders help free up time to suck on their metaphorical dummies, and do things like go to the pub, watch Chelsea in the Champions League, read Hello, buy plant pots and lampshades, watch Big Brother and work out where to go on holiday. Peoples' ability to suck on their metaphorical dummies, depends, of course on the supply of dummies, which in turn depends on the complex of systems, regulations and policies developed by the elected government. The free-riders know this, they're not stupid, but they'd rather not think about it. People in this group might explain their apathy by saying they don't think their vote doesn't count, or that politicians are all the same. But they don't really mean it - in the same way that they're too lazy to go to vote, they're too lazy to think of why they don't vote - so they resort to clichés. After all, it's what people will expect them to say, it gives the media what they want. It's another way of getting out of thinking. There's a bit of free-rider in all of us. This is partly because, people tend to treat elections like supermarkets. Candidates are consumer items. Around election time, the TV and radio are awash with adverts urging us to choose our favourite candidates. If we can't find a candidate we like, we simply go back home, empty-handed and complain about having no one to vote for, as if we all had a God given right to a political party that matched our personal profile. Interestingly, the media never encourages us to start our own political parties - and make and sell our own candidates. Very few people ever think about setting up their own brand.

Whilst some people are lazy buggers, there is another more sinister reason for why people don't vote. The main reason people don't vote is because they are fuelled by a deep need to dominate - a need which democratic politics does not fulfil. The people who think like this often view themselves as 'victims' of an 'injustice' but in actual fact their 'injustice' stems not from being a 'victim' but from the frustration of not being able to dominate, of not seeing one's ideas predominate. They are essentially undemocratic, but would not admit to it. Most of them are too 'right on'. They claim that all political parties are the same, but they've never read a single party manifesto, nor could they ever tell you anything about what political parties stand for - because they're not the slightest bit interested in democratic politics. These 'victims' will claim that politicians never listen to people. For example, a couple of weeks ago I saw a poet called 'Oneness' talking on the news about how politicians don't do what the people want. However this claim is not grounded in the reality of British political life, a life that is awash with focus groups, consultations, feedback forms, public participation initiatives, the vote and other devices for politicians and political institutions to listen to the views of the public. Furthermore, don't people want different things? Is it really as simple as saying the people want one thing, and politicians do something else? I mean, what kind of government would survive if day after day it did exactly the opposite to what people wanted? When these 'victims' complain that politicians never listen to the people, they're drawing more from their own psychological desire for 'politicians as foot servants', rather than a desire for democratic politics. When people like Oneness start talking about 'what the people want', you know they're up to something, using 'the will of the people' as a 'Trojan Horse' for their own desires. Of course, if listening to the people, means obeying the dictates of what you believe to be the will of the people, then yes, no politician would ever listen, unless of course you were a dictator. This group of 'victims' - who hate politicians because they do not act as foot servants to their personal desires, seems to be increasing in size. At the moment it has no impact on politics, it doesn't vote, and for this reason, political parties are not interested in it. However, it could form a massive voting block, as large if not larger than the group that elected the New Labour government in 2001. At the moment, this group is fragmented and largely ignored (if you don't vote, you don't count). However it is psychologically united, and a potential reservoir of support for anyone who can tap into it. The people in this group are waiting for someone to come along and 'feel their pain' - to tell them they've been victims of an injustice. They're waiting for an abomination - which will do away with the need for negotiation, compromise and empathy - and hand each of them a sword - and place before them, their enemies, tied up, blindfolded and pacified. And whilst they're busy stabbing the hearts of their victims and revelling in their screams, they will be expecting their newly democratically elected power to whisper to them in a soothing manner 'there there - it's all over'. April 2005

Terrence James

So what do you think of what you've just read? Please write and tell us!