An open letter to, well, everyone.
To the Honourable Members of Parliament and My Fellow Canadians,
This is an open letter to explain why I chose not to participate in the 2011 Canadian Federal Election. When I told an acquaintance of mine that I was not voting as a means of protest, he did not believe Ottawa would get the message I was trying to convey and that my non-participation would be attributed to voter apathy. In this election, my feelings were far from apathetic. In fact, I have never had stronger feelings towards politics in my country as I did during this election. So I felt it necessary to make my views public in this letter so that my point would be heard. After all, a protest is useless if nobody knows about it. I have no political affiliation or leaning. I do not blindly follow the left or the right. Because we live in a rapidly and ever changing world, I do what I feel is in the best interests for my country at the time regardless of conservative or liberal ideologies. In short, I ask myself, what is the right thing to do? In this case, I felt I needed to make a stand. There are three main reasons why I did not vote in the 2011 federal election outlined below.
First, I completely disagreed with the need for an election. I felt that holding a non-confidence vote for the minority Conservative government was reckless and not in the best interests of this great country. The Liberal party claimed that the government would not provide budget information (http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-03/26/c_13798642.htm). The Conservatives, as a minority, needed to know when full disclosure was required. They claim the non-confidence vote was opportunistic for the Liberals to gain power. It became a “he said she said” fight where each side blamed the other for the election. But one thing is certain: it was not necessary. I felt this way even before the results were known. Hindsight just proves my belief. My observation is that the two major issues facing Canada are the economy and the environment. Coming out negative on either is political suicide; especially the environment given the global attitude on the subject. So the main issue becomes one of how each party proposes to strengthen the Canadian economy. What the government was doing was working.
According to CIBC World Markets (via Michael Babad of the Globe and Mail – April 25, 2011 - http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/top-business-stories/did-canadas-economy-stall-out-in-february/article1998180/), Canada had four consecutive months of robust growth under a minority Conservative government. We are coming out of what was arguably the greatest global economic crisis since the Great Depression. Economic recovery is a fragile process that can be derailed easily. We were on the right path with the minority. Sometimes the status quo is actually a good thing. Conservatives are normally less likely to overspend. But having a minority government ensured that their financial thriftiness would be kept in check and they would still spend money where it was needed.
According to the Vancouver Sun ( March 26, 2011 - http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Canadians+will+this+election+they+always/4492854/story.html) , the 2008 election cost $325 million. Given the fragility of the economic recovery, all party leaders should have recognized that this money would be better spent elsewhere. While it may not be a lot of money in the big picture (our GDP is around $1.3 trillion), I do believe the saying, “every little bit counts” when it comes to money and budgeting. My feeling was that this election was a waste of money and should never have happened. Therefore, I had a moral objection to participating in it. Participation would have implied consent on my part. I will not give my consent to something I do not believe is right.
Second, I did not feel that there was a positive option for me to choose in this election. My first year university political studies professor said that a politician's goal is to be re-elected, not what is in Canada's best interests. It has become a personal power struggle between the three major party leaders rather than a responsible government. Of the four parties running in my riding, there were none that my conscience would allow me to give consent to. I will address all four:
- Why not Conservative? - I believe that they purposely antagonized the opposition into a non-confidence vote in order to obtain a majority government. That was a tactic I could not, in good conscience, condone. As I've mentioned, I believe that the minority government was right for the country.
- Why not Liberal? - I believe that the Liberal Party forced a non-confidence vote to push their own agenda and form a coalition government even though that was not what the country needed. I had originally considered voting for them because they were taking the high road in their advertising and I liked that Michael Ignatieff knows how the world works because he has been more than a politician. But once the polls showed they were slipping, they started attacking their opponents. Rather than sticking to their guns (something I could respect) they caved in and fell off the higher road.
- Why not NDP? - I cannot in good conscience vote for a party that I do not believe will be fiscally responsible. I believe the NDP will spend money when it may not be necessary. One cannot fix problems simply by throwing money at them. This is a personal belief and opinion. But this letter is about my personal beliefs.
- Why not the Green Party? - A party that has one agenda rather than a total platform to do what's right for Canada will likely never get my vote. If you want to lead this country, you have to be able to competently address all of the issues; not just the environment. When the Green Party can prove to me that they can completely govern this country, I may consider voting for them.
- Why not spoil my ballot? - That's the same thing as not voting. I wanted to make my concerns heard. Going to the polls and “participating” in this way would be hypocritical on my part. There would be a record of me voting. This implies consent to the event on my part and I would not give consent to this election. You may say that it at least gives me the right to comment or complain and that it is the participation that is necessary. I disagree and will address this concept later. When I was in college, a classmate had a crisis of belief on a class assignment. The professor tried to convince him to just “play the game this time” to avoid controversy. The student dug his heels in and refused. Even though I thought the assignment was an inconsequential, theoretical exercise at the time, I have a tremendous respect for that student who stood up for his beliefs when put in that situation. My conscience and personal conviction would not allow me to just “play the game” on this one.
Third, attack ads. We used to be so much more civil to each other in our elections than our neighbours to the south. Then, the Conservatives decided to make fun of Jean Chretien's face and Pandora's Box was opened. Do not tell me why I should not vote for the other guy. Why should I vote for you?
We live in an instant information society. With all of the media outlets available, you can give me the “Coles Notes” on your platform. There are so many ways to easily tell me what you plan for my country. You cannot attack the other guy and then expect me to go to your website or seek out your platform as the Liberal Party did in their eleventh hour advertising. Furthermore, you cannot rely on a 60+ page pdf document on your website to be your positive campaigning as the Conservative Party did. In today's instant information society, nobody will read it. Even one of my politically conscious friends took one look at it and said something like “I can't read all that” and moved on. Between these three reasons, the only way for me to keep a clean conscience and know I did what I felt was the right thing, was to protest by withholding my vote.
The general feeling in a democracy is that, if one chooses not to vote, that person gives up the right to voice their opinion on the results of an election and the policies that arise from it. This is simply not true. Canada is still a free country. I still have the right to free speech and expression. As long as the government spends my tax dollars, I can comment on the policy and how those dollars are used. Telling me I cannot comment when my personal beliefs will not let me do something the government and others want me to do sounds a lot like tyranny to me. I will use the example of the South Park Episode, “Douche and Turd” (Season 8, Episode 8). Please forgive the vulgarity of the title as there is no disrespect meant on my part. In this episode, one of the characters is bullied into choosing between two ludicrous choices for school mascot. He stood his ground because he felt that he should not be coerced into making a choice when there is no good choice. While I realize that South Park is not meant to be taken too seriously, it can sometimes provide a very poignant social commentary. Like the South Park character, I felt it was time to take a stand rather than cave to public pressure. After all, if you went to a buffet and all of the food was rotten, would you eat it just so you could complain about it? I doubt it.
While my vote is secret, my conscience will not allow me to give consent to a party or an event that I do not believe is good for my country. Voting is a personal thing. We each get one vote and how we use it is up to our own conviction. This was mine and I applaud all of the people who followed their heart and did what they thought was right on May 2. Will I ever vote again? Probably. This was the first federal election I did not vote in since I became eligible. We'll see how I feel about the state of this country in 4-5 years and I will decide then.
Sincerely,
Adam Lehmann
Saskatoon, SK (Blackstrap Constituency)
