Who Should I Vote For?

 

Whenever there is an election we are faced with the same question: who should I vote for?

Since “government”, the political direction and control exercised over the actions of the citizens of a country, province or municipality, has such a major impact on your life do you not think it is something that should be given some thought? Yet far too many of us do not. People typically fall into the following groups: those that have a sense of what issues are important, idealogues (“I have always voted for party X”) and the flighty (“who talks the best/looks the best, etc.). The latter are the most volatile as they are easy victims to false advertising whether it be campaign slogans or media “scandals”.

What is really required, and typically helps guide the first group, is to take some time to look at the substance of the candidates and their respective platforms. Does candidate A, an incumbent, have a proven track record of delivering on previous pledges ("promises”)? Does candidate B have a solid track record from previous elected roles whereby they did more than just provide lip service? Or does candidate C offer a new perspective with potentially viable suggested solutions? Do their positions make sense economically as well as socially? Remember that “government” is fuelled by the taxes you pay. Are they being spent “wisely”? The government has a fiduciary duty to serve the citizens the best they can. Are they doing that?

It is complicated these days in that many sources of information are very biased. A quick way to filter out negative bias is to get a handle on the perspective being presented. Can it be described as favouring “Marxism”? Note that this political view is very shallow being based on the false assumption that we are divided into the “oppressed” and “oppressors”. When ever it has been tried it has failed in that the “oppressed” become the oppressors and then, drunk on the newly attained “power” do everything they can to maintain that power. An extreme example was Pol Pot in Cambodia. When your solution is to kill as many of your former “oppressors” something is wrong with you, not them.

Over the last half century, we have seen significant advances in overcoming major societal problems, such as racism and sexism. Unfortunately, those that fought for those changes, now that the goals have been met, are lost and now in search of new giants to kill. But in doing so they have become like Don Quixote in that the giants they now see are figments of their imagination. “Black Lives Matter” is a good example. Of course, black lives matter, but so do all others! To focus on one racial group is to revert to the racism of the past. “Me too” is no different. Women are, outside of biology, equal to men thanks to the advances of “Feminism”. But now to say that men lie but women do not is again a repudiation of all that was gained. Both movements fall into the Marxist Oppressor/Oppressed dichotomy that is morally bankrupt.

Another filter to consider is what is our strength as a society? Is it really a “strength” to focus on how we are different? Or is it our commonalities? There is a parable I heard a long time ago that made sense then and still does. A stick can be easily broken but when several sticks are bundled together, they become strong. And so, it is with a country, for example. If we work together for the common good, then we are strong. But if we work against each other focusing on our differences we are weak. Therefore, any person who promotes unity is promoting strength and those who promote differences is not. It is always better, for example, to negotiate from a position of strength than it is of weakness.

Also important are good morals and ethics and both flow from one who believes in “truth”. These days truth is easily hidden unless you have skills that help you unwrap the lies and deceit typically used to hide the truth. Even if you lack relevant skills a good way to expose the truth is to see and hear opposing views. More likely than not the one view that spends more time on demonstrable facts is likely closer to the truth than the one that makes a point of dismissing other views out of hand by using name calling as their primary tool.

Every voter should take their duty seriously. Do your research. Look at the character of those being evaluated and not the superficial. Check their track record. Have they changed positions many times over the past like a sailing ship tacking to go with changing wind conditions? Or have they maintained a steady course backed by good moral and ethical reasons? Are your measures of character controlled by how someone talks or the fact you do not like their looks? Then review them using other methods such as the written word so that you can get past your own biases.

If you do not have the desire to do the work, then do not vote. Leave the choice up to those who have done the due diligence. Having the right to vote gives you great power. But as Uncle Ben told Spiderman: “With great power comes great responsibility”. So, use it wisely. If you are not wise, then do not use it.