When Russell Brand called for a “socialist revolution”, I was rather annoyed. The celebrity, who does not enjoy an entirely spotless reputation, has little about his lifestyle and actions that strikes me as socialist. I won’t go into painstaking detail, but your typical socialist (particularly not the revolutionary socialist he claims to be) is not a misogynistic multimillionaire. Socialist millionaires spend a lot of time using their money fairly and feeling faintly guilty. Nevertheless, it was Brand’s open admission that he is a non-voter that was most controversial.
Jeremy Paxman, the famously bold presenter of the BBC’s Newsnight programme, attacked Brand, saying
“If you can’t be arsed to vote, why should we be arsed to listen to your political point of view?”
A very good, if strongly worded, point. One should always vote in any election, for public apathy always kills democracy off very gradually but effectively. But unfortunately, Paxman was speaking from a glasshouse, as he later conceded to the Radio Times magazine:
The whole greenbench pantomime in Westminster looks a remote and self important echo chamber. But it is all we have. By the time the polls had closed [in 2010] and it was too late to take part, I was feeling really uncomfortable: the person who chooses not to vote – cannot even be bothered to write ‘none of the above’ on a ballot paper – disqualifies himself from passing any comment at all.
Paxman regrets having not voted in the last general election, saying that although he found the major parties’ offers “unappetising” (which I can understand: 2010 was a hard year in politics), that was no excuse for neglecting his moral obligation to vote. Frankly, I knew it all along: with that new beard of his, he would be a non-voter, wouldn’t he?
Anyhow, who would be the first to criticise this act of brazen hypocrisy? Step forward… Nick Clegg. The Deputy Prime Minister used his weekly programme on LBC radio to berate Paxman, adding the unique argument that his £1,000,000 salary exists only because of the political proccess. Clegg’s willingness to condemn the scariest journalist in politics might have been encouraged by Paxman’s claim that the Lib Dems’ tuition fee pledge was “the biggest lie in recent political history” or by Clegg’s eagerness to distract the media from his claiming of energy bills on Parliamentary expenses whilst the rest of us endure huge price rises.
Unfortunately, it is the apathy of the disheartened ‘radicals’ and the “unappetised” sceptical voters that allows the likes of Mr Clegg to feel able to attack others for misusing democratic privileges. So remember: if you don’t vote, it’s only you who will be paying the energy bill for the Deputy Prime Minister’s second home.
The Political Idealist 
But I think I have a right not to vote if there is no candidate/party I want to vote for. This doesn’t disqualify me from anything. I’m still here, active and complaining, and paying taxes to these buggers. I do think the old anarchist (I think) slogan “Don’t vote, it only encourages them” often has something going for it. It isn’t Paxman or any of us who withhold our votes to spend a guilt-ridden, sleepless, post-election night feeling remorse. Electoral discontent shouldn’t be blamed on the (non-) voters. It is a sign of the bankruptcy of the parliamentary system itself and the need to get rid of it. How to do that? Now, there’s a question, and one which, it is true, Russell Brand hasn’t answered either.
Electoral discontent is indeed a problem that will not be made any better by blaming non-voters. However, I do agree with Paxman that spoiling one’s ballot is a better way of registering it, as it shows that one has taken trouble and thought to register their thoughts.
Personally, I’m not convinced that there’s any better alternative form of democracy than the parliamentary system.
I seem to have left out a word or two! I meant “It isn’t good for Paxman or any of us … to spend etc.” Apologies – and I’m a bloody proofreader!
I imagine writing outside of work would require taking a busman’s holiday if you’re a proofreader! No need to apologise.
Hi Jack,
I think there is a challenge for all of those of us who are committed to participating in elections to ensure not only that we continue to do so, but that we also remain alert to the voices of people like Brand, Paxman and the unknown people who have been raising concerns via this weeks PM programme. The current system may not be completely broken, but it is not in good health. I have always voted, but I am also committed to ensuring that I have confidence in the system that sets my laws. For me that means breaking down the party system so that it is the electors and not the party godfathers or their funders who control the nation. In that I find myself in agreement with Brand and Paxman, even if I do not agree with their personal tactics.
Hi,
There’s certainly a huge problem with engagement, and I agree that we should be alert to it. I will confess to lacking patience for hypocrites who lack patience for other hypocrites. There is plenty of value in what Paxman proceeded to say, to be fair.