Social Science Dimensions
  • Home
  • Services
    • Impact Assessment, Monitoring and Evaluation, and Social Research
    • Land Research and Policy
    • Justice and Dispute Resolution
    • Political Economy Analysis
    • Governance, Policy Development, and Sustainable Public Administration
    • Sustainability and Natural Resource Governance
    • Rural Development
    • Project Design and Proposal Development
    • Health
  • Portfolio
    • Portfolio Standard
    • Portfolio Mobile
  • Approaches
    • Survey Design
    • Data Management
  • Blog
    • Chronological Blog
  • Contact
  • Resources / Library

​Disaffection is the New Black

10/1/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
Graham Ring
A turbulent 2016 saw Britain vote to Brexit, and a clutch of their European neighbours veer to the political right. In the US, a man with no experience in the military or the public service is about to become leader of the free world for the next four years. 

In Australia, a double dissolution election meant that senate seats could be won for half the usual number of votes. Voters returned a ragtag bunch of minor parties, along with a bewildering bunch of independents including David Leyonhjelm, Derryn Hinch and Jacqui Lambie. 

Our much vaunted system of democratic election, means that this result is, by definition, legitimate.  The People Have Spoken, and The Voters Are Never Wrong.  That said, it’s worth musing about just why the voters made these decisions.

At a superficial level, the answer to this question has been shouted from the rooftops: The electorate is disaffected.  But what does this mean? 

Australia has enjoyed many consecutive years of economic growth. And our material standard of living is higher than it has ever been, even if the distribution of this wealth is uneven. So why the backlash?

Anyhow, the ‘disaffection’ we vented at the ballot box has seen a bunch of randoms installed in the Senate. Just how this will improve things is not entirely clear. What is apparent is that the government’s legislative agenda will grind to a halt, since nothing can get through the upper house without protracted horse-trading with these liquorice all-sorts.

Our system does not require voters to be informed, only to cast a ballot for a candidate of their choice. Even if it’s Pauline. This is widely believed to be a good thing.

​Specific policy detail from the minor parties and the independents was very thin on the ground during the campaign, but that didn’t seem to matter. We voted for them anyway. Apparently we wanted to ‘shake things up’. Now we wait in trepidation for our monster to mature.

​Perhaps next time we should invite candidates to make clear and specific promises about what they intend to do if they win office. Then we can make an informed choice based on this information. Or not.

​In any case, allowing politicians to let rhetoric masquerade as policy does not serve us well. 

Graham Ring is a Darwin based writer and journalist.

0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Archives

    September 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    May 2019
    July 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    October 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    March 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    January 2014
    September 2013
    November 2012
    May 2012
    April 2012
    February 2012

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.