Why would people vote against their own interests? Why do so many people choose not to vote at all? Some of the answers lie with the very structure of the American political system and the ideological rules that are currently being followed.
Noam Chomsky has always said that the US has two business class parties. Ostensibly, they agree on a core of values and only differ on a few social and economic ones, just enough to differentiate themselves (modestly from the other).
” -In the US, there is basically one party – the business party. It has two factions, called Democrats and Republicans, which are somewhat different but carry out variations on the same policies. By and large, I am opposed to those policies. As is most of the population.”
-Noam Chomsky
So, it is a terrible system for most, except for the people in power. Rob Urie explains:
“Tacticians for the political establishment(s) understand that electoral politics is antithetical to democracy, which is why they use strategies of exclusion to maintain their lock on power. This unity through exclusion is what makes the pretense that they— Democrats versus Republicans, are ideological combatants so self-serving and implausible. Either Party could expand the electorate by bringing in unaffiliated and disaffected voters, and in-so-doing dominate American politics. But to do so, they would have to offer a political program that voters want.
The U.S. has a very low electoral turnout rate compared with other so-called democracies. The question then is why Democrats would focus their efforts on luring a small number of suburban Republicans to vote for Democrats rather than on the large number of eligible voters from urban, suburban and rural working class and poor neighborhoods? The answer is class. The oligarchs + the richest 9.9% won’t support policies that benefit poor and working-class voters. They might oppose racism, but not poverty.
One easy way to expand the electorate is to stop excluding it. Old news here— voter suppression is rampant in the U.S. While this is a favorite tactic of Republicans, Democrats have passed up every opportunity to 1) force Republicans to stop doing it and 2) enact universal suffrage. Here’s the rub— even if Democrats accepted 20% voter suppression as a background level, they could still craft policies that support the poor and working class and bring in tens of millions of voters by doing so. But they apparently don’t want ‘those people’ voting.
In 2018 in my poor and working class, 98% Democrat, neighborhood, the Democrats left door tags with two messages: property tax ‘relief’ that has little appeal in a 90%+ renter neighborhood and ‘stopping Trump.’ This neighborhood suffered horribly in the Bush / Obama years from the twin catastrophes of de-industrialization and financialization. De-industrialization took away the jobs and then financialization made housing unaffordable while growing a below living-wage chain-store economy that bankrupted local businesses.”
Breaking out of the two party system is the first requirement for any sort of authentic change not only in American society, but also in Canada as well. The two ‘preferred choices’ both serve a narrow slice of the population while essentially disenfranchising the rest.
If we wish to see real change, we will need to address the systemic electoral obstacles first.
4 comments
June 13, 2019 at 2:17 pm
deborahpeifer
I think this may have been true at some point, but is certainly not true now. We have one political party in the US, the Democratic Party. On the other side is a collection of corrupt, racist, and misogynist thieves who have no interest whatever in governance. Claiming the parties are the same keeps people from voting, and in the current administration, that is tantamount to suicide. The Republicans need to lose and lose badly before they will try to be an actual political party again. When that happens, if it happens, we may indulge in both-sides-ism. But not now.
LikeLike
June 13, 2019 at 6:55 pm
bleatmop
I would agree with the sentiment of this post but no with the content. I don’t think a third party would actually fix anything without fixed laws on who can finance political parties and political advertisements. And since corporations are immortal people in the USA and have many of the same rights as flesh and blood people it would take a constitutional amendment in order to fix the rotten to the core system that is USian politics. Being that getting a constitutional amendment in is a huge political venture and being that the immortals would oppose such an amendment tooth and nail, I think the chances of USian politics ever being fixed as being slim to none.
Also to deborahpeifer – I don’t think it’s unfair to say that there are two corporate parties in the USA. It is a statement of fact, not opinion. Watching Knock Down the House on Netflix just shows how corrupted the DNC has become. That they anoint candidates and take the voices away from the people of whom they are supposed to represent is the ultimate insult to any democracy. The GOP may be full of anti-democratic, corporate shill sellout, social regressive but the DNC is full of anti-democratic, corporate shill sellout, reluctant social progressives. What an amazing choice the USian people have to make! Here is hoping that AOC, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley, and Ilhan Omar can get reelected, the Justice Democrats and grow and eventually take and purge the corruption from this party.
LikeLike
June 16, 2019 at 9:55 am
The Arbourist
@Deborahpeifer
But why vote when what you get is more of the same? Neo-liberal corporatism is the name of the game for both the establishment Democrats and the Republicans. Voting is no salve to this particular problem.
Like they did in 2008? There was no regeneration there. They continue to drag the political zeitgeist to the right, and the dems continue to follow.
Another Hope and Change moment? The first two years of the Obama Presidency is exactly the problem. He had a majority in both houses and observe how much he changed the system for the better… Did he engage in meaningful systemic change, or did he continue the policies of the previous administration with kinder, more gentle face? Republican obstructionism is a redherring; nothing really changed because the interests of the status quo remained the same.
LikeLike
June 16, 2019 at 9:58 am
The Arbourist
@Bleatmop
It would shake the lobbyist/corruption tree up a bit, and then there might be some space for policies that actually benefit the working class. It happened in Alberta with the NDP. But that’s over now and we can happily bend the knee to business and oil interests for the next 4 years.
LikeLiked by 1 person