AV - Not what you can do for your political party, but what you can do for your democracy
The argument is now over, and all the parties can do is look at the fall out from the campaign and decide what must be done next, in fact many of the politicians have been doing this before the first vote had been cast such is the political machine. I have to point out that I voted for AV as it seem logical that if someone is going to get his snout in the trough at my expense then they had better been elected by over 50% of the electorate - and while I am on the subject of the electorate let me say that I think there should be compulsory voting - but that is another argument!
Listening to the debates, well the sound bites really as we don't debate lofty ideas in this country as much as throw soundbites around like confetti until enough sticks (ooh nearly mixed a metaphor there!), it was obvious the vote was about politics. For some it may be strange to think of the AV issue as being anything but politics, but surely it should be about something higher that, perhaps it should have been about was fairer, what enshrined the ideals of democracy and not about what was best for one political party or another.
The argument has been about self-interest, and not the greater good, and the debate has degenerated into mud slinging between Cameron and Clegg, with Millliband attempting to play 'honest''. I suppose the idea of a politician playing honest is unfortunately a misnomer but the media has portrayed both parties as self serving; and lets face the LibDems will be consigned to limbo for the next 20 years, they have had one glorious year in the sun, to bask in the media spotlight and play their 'ace in the hole' - but their day is over, and their chance evaporating with each vote cast.
The debate, and I use the word 'debate' as a metaphor for what for what happened, was not lofty it was crass and self-seeking, if you want to see what a reasoned arguement looks like I refer you to the State Legislature of Massaschutess on whether marriage should be defined as being solely between and a man and a woman. I was amazed when I saw the clip on U Tube, here was a man arguing rationally about why this should not be so, we were taken from point to point, with recognition of the opposing argument and with the conclusion that the listeners, in private, should reflect on their views. The presentation was was an object lesson in serious people talking about serious issues- and proof that the 'ya-boo' politics which has marred the discussion of serious issues for the past 50 years.
Again I bring my blog back to the question 'what was the best outcome for democracy and not was the best for politicians .
Perhaps it is time we all asked 'not what can your country do for you' but what you can do for your country.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
