Is there any point in voting in the election?
My social media feeds are total of contradictory views on the election, with different friends and acquaintances spelling out with vigour and passion why it is simply impossible to vote for Labour, the Conservatives and the LibDems in plough. I cannot vote for the SNP or DUP, and a vote for 1 of the smaller parties will have no effect in our crazy 'first by the post' system. (My simply consolation is that all this proves I exercise not live in a social media bubble of confirming views.)
And then why carp?
I repost here equally a guest commodity a slice by my friendJohn Stevens. It caught my eye considering he perfectly expressed the dilemma that I and many others feel—and yet at the cease of it he calls usa both to transcendent hope and prophetic engagement, which is surely the identify that we ought to be.
As the General Election approaches, I experience increasingly depressed by the state of British politics. It seems to me nosotros have an invidious choice to make betwixt deeply flawed candidates advocating deeply flawed manifestos. In a starker way than in other recent elections it feels every bit if wisdom means choosing the least worst option from everything that is on the election. "None of the above" is never a real culling, and then information technology comes down to who volition do least damage to the nation and the cause of the gospel inside information technology. I begin to have much more empathy for the evangelicals in the U.s.a. who voted for Trump. I might not have agreed with their calculation that he was amend than Hillary, but I have much more understanding of the dilemma they faced.
I can't see how an evangelical Christian could be an enthusiastic supporter of any of the mainland parties or candidates. They are all equally committed to the liberal progressive agenda, with only marginal differences on key social policy issues. Social conservatism is unrepresented. At that place is no party actively courting and seeking the "evangelical vote" because we are then small that we don't matter, and to do so would exist regarded as toxic.
The Labour Party seems to be led past a man who is deeply sincere in his convictions, just his Marxist convictions are, in my view, sincerely unsafe. To be weighed against this, more moderate Labour MPs and the safeguards of the British Constitution would probably constrain him in practice, as would any coalition partners. He may fifty-fifty be forced to stand up aside to allow a workable coalition to form.
Boris Johnson is a man who seems to accept no discernible deep convictions, relieve the pursuit of his own dream to exist Prime Minister. He is a shape-shifter who adopts whatsoever opinion he calculates will exist to his advantage. The fact that he wrote ii manufactures ahead of the European union referendum, both equally passionately argued, one advocating Remain and 1 advocating Exit earlier joining the Vote Leave campaign tells yous all you need to know. I have no idea whether he thinks he believes what he says or if he is more than cynically calculating.
He is a proven liar whose word cannot exist trusted, who avoids the virtually challenging scrutiny. Any other political leader would have been destroyed past the Jenny Arcuri allegations, which are far worse than the expenses scandals that landed other MPs in prison. No charity trustee or leader of a public establishment would get away with giving public coin to someone without disclosing a patent personal conflict of involvement.
The Liberal Democrats have behaved with hubris, and Jo Swinson seems to accept over-reached herself and her lack of experience has been cruelty exposed. Their liberal progressivism verges on becoming illiberal and intolerant. At that place are MPs in all three parties who would make far better leaders than the present incumbents.
Living in England at that place are other parties yous can't vote for. The SNP will probably romp home is Scotland, but Nicola Sturgeon seems deeply intolerant of those who disagree with her. I feel lamentable for voters in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein wins seats merely won't take them. The DUP wants Brexit but has never been able to suggest a practicable solution for the issues of identity and cantankerous-border merchandise that leaving the Eu volition inevitably crusade. I suspect that, whatever the result, the Spousal relationship volition not remain intact for much longer.
The question that virtually interests me most is, how has it come to this? It was non that long ago that the electorate was filled with hope and optimism belting out "things can only become better." Today there is picayune enthusiasm, and many are merely hoping that things won't become much worse.
The root crusade is obviously the desperate spiritual state of our nation, and that people have turned away from trusting the Lord Jesus and living by his give-and-take. This ought to make us weep and pray for revival. From a more secular perspective a number of factors have contributed to the electric current political context, all of which are interrelated.
i. The swing voters are no longer the centrists
Austerity and Brexit take reshaped the political landscape, and the parties accept had to answer to the ascent of populism. Elections are always contested on the footing of the concerns of the probable swing voters who will determine the issue, with the main parties competing to gain their back up. For much of the last 30 years that has been a contest to win the vote of centrists, simply now it is a battle to win the vote of the disaffected extremes.
Populism, especially the existential threat of UKIP and The Brexit Political party to the two main parties, has meant that neither tin realistically gain an overall bulk without attracting their supporters. This has led Boris Johnson to turn the Tories into a committed Go out party with no room for dissent, and Jeremy Corbyn to try to maintain an "all things to all people" ambiguity on Brexit. Both are driven past fear of losing a core component of their vote and letting the other side in by default, rather than by a positive vision. Boris Johnson has sought to clothe himself in statist taxation and spend policies, which are the very antithesis of the free trade economic liberalism that has animated the Tory Brexitiers. Are they using him or is he using them?
ii. Centrist voters no longer bring together political parties
Centrists might bewail the choice they face but, in the end, this is the consequence of their own failure to participate in the political process. The main political parties used to be mass movements with large memberships. Over the final fifty years membership and participation has declined dramatically, so that the active members of the parties are fatigued from the rank of activists and lobbyists.
The membership changes introduced by Ed Miliband allowed Momentum to orchestrate a de facto take-over of the political party, past galvanising their devotees to join solely for the purpose of electing a Marxist leader. Those moderate MPs who nominated Corbyn simply to let a wider choice on the election must have spent the terminal iv years ruing their foolishness. The composition of the Tory membership has changed just because new members have not joined. The constituency association memberships accept get older and more correct-wing as a consequence.
Both parties accept now moved to the direct election of their leaders by the membership, rather than by the trunk of MPs, with the result that the electorate is wildly unrepresentative of nearly of the people who lend their support to the political party in public elections.
Centrists have behaved as if the terminate of history had arrived and there was no longer any need to bother near the messy and time-consuming business of politics, and that this could be safely left to others. They have miscalculated. I have never belonged to a political office and admit that I am as guilty every bit anyone. Salubrious civic institutions, including political parties, require the participation of the body politic.
iii. The main parties are no longer operation as moderating entities
Politics parties take historically had the outcome of mustering broad coalitions of the left or of the right, and therefore of moderating more farthermost positions. The Labour Party has always had a racially socialist fly, but leaders such as Clement Attlee, Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have ploughed a less radical furrow, frequently attracting swell hostility and accusations of treachery for their pains. When a radical leader has been appointed past ane party, the other has by and large responded by offering a comparatively moderate culling. It is hard to remember that between 1979-1983 Margaret Thatcher had followed relatively centrist policies. The radical reforms but came later when she no longer felt the need to placate the "wets".
The radicalisation of the political party memberships, together with the direct ballot of leaders, has inevitably radicalised the parties as a whole. What is perhaps unique is that this has happened to both parties at the same time.
This radicalisation is seen in the half-hearted attempts of both parties to deal with racist attitudes amongst a minority of their hardcore supporters. The Labour Political party has failed to bargain with anti-Semitism, which is the form of racism that most afflicts those who hate global capitalism and imperialism. The Tory Political party has failed to tackle Islamophobia, which is the form of racism that nearly afflicts those who have a nostalgia for a past white national identity.
In both cases I fright that the parties take a vested interest in non tackling the problem thoroughly because this would alienate some of the very people they need to attract and agree to give them a gamble of victory. Sadly, some voters are racist, whether anti-Semitic, anti-Islamic or both. Populism has seduced parties into courtship these voters equally a affair of necessity.
Those who ally themselves with racists in order to scrape the majority they need to win are in danger of selling their souls. There tin can exist no going back in one case the genie is out of the bottle. Moderate politics relies on both parties refusing to play that game for their own reward. I fright that pragmatism and agony to win have meant they have both succumbed. The ends tin can never justify the means.
four. Character is no longer seen as essential for leadership
A farther gene that has ensured nosotros have such an insidious selection is that our culture has rejected the importance of character every bit a pre-requisite for public office and service. The quality of a person's individual life is no longer seen as meaning.
Boris Johnson has a well-documented cluttered private life, including failed marriages and multiple diplomacy. Nosotros still do non know how many children he acknowledges. Some of his lovers take had abortions. He has been proven to prevarication and has lost his job considering of his lack of trustworthiness and integrity on several occasions. Many of his colleagues don't trust him, but they cross their fingers because they hope he volition be a winner. Yet these failings are dismissed as mere peccadillos, and to some are fifty-fifty bonny marks of his humanity. Jeremy Corbyn has a similar chequered personal history, every bit does Nigel Farage.
In the by there was institutionalised hypocrisy and cover-up of personal failings and infidelities (eg The Profumo Affair and John Major'southward "Dorsum to Nuts" sleaze fiasco). But the uncritical credence of key character flaws, and in some instances their celebration as a qualification for popular support, means that we get the politicians we deserve.
We elect liars, so they lie to united states of america. Nosotros elect those who have shown they are untrustworthy in their words and promises, and and so they break their promises to us. We give them the permission to be who they are because we put them into role regardless. We can hardly complain.
5. The electorate doesn't want to face reality
Politics has become the ultimate consumer action. We, the voters, are the market, so the politicians accept to offer us what we say we want—preferably for free because it will exist paid for past someone else. Parties have become good at marketing and advertising strategies, appealing to dissimilar segments of the electorate with different letters, stoking their personal fears and promising to indulge their personal agendas. It is the political equivalent of the targeted marketing made possible past supermarket loyalty cards. In many cases what we want is not even possible. In that location are limited resources and difficult choices must exist fabricated. Cultural change and economic transformation are long term not short term.
The main parties are all offering massive increases in spending and acting every bit if the financial crash did not happen. They pretend that austerity was not forced upon us by economic circumstances and the pressure level of global financial markets. The near respected independent bodies say that none of their figures add together up.
The inverse battleground for this election is said to be a event of disillusionment with the old politics. I fright that, whoever wins, there will be far greater disillusionment to come. Heir-apparent's regret is almost inevitable, as when the payment holiday on a credit buy ends and y'all have to starting time paying back.
Many of the promises being fabricated are unaffordable, unachievable or unlikely to evangelize the claimed benefits (rail re-nationalisation for case). The main parties are playing the populist game, but the anger that will follow their failure to deliver may cause something far worse to sally.
It is equally possible that a cold dose of reality will return politics to the previous norm, as is happening in other countries that take experimented with populism, as radical politicians are forced to moderate in office by the harsh facts of life and international coin markets. Nosotros may all wake up with a populist hangover and wish we had never tried it.
The root problem is that we do non like to hear too much reality, nor to accept to make hard choices. Boris Johnson in one case promised that on Europe he was in favour of having cake and eating information technology, which is what virtually of us desire in every expanse of life. Yet skillful leadership must speak the truth and explain the real options. If either side chooses to break this convention with fantasy promises, the other side if forced to answer in kind. It precipitates an arms race of faux hope, which will ultimately bankrupt everyone.
Churches beware!
The dynamics that accept produced this choice at the election have the potential to affect any community organisation, including the church. If we fail participate, ally ourselves with those with unacceptable views for pragmatic reasons, forget that grapheme rather than but charisma or competence is essential for leadership, and prefer to be told what nosotros desire to hear rather than to be told exist told the truth, we have only ourselves to blame if our institutional culture is compromised and undermined.
I take no idea who volition win this election. I will endeavour to cull how to do my vote based on the common appurtenances of civic peace and the protection of religious liberty and gospel freedom—every bit these seem to me to exist Biblical priorities. Whomever I vote for, I volition do and then with a mensurate of reservation and regret that at that place was not a choice that is more fully aligned with my convictions. I volition have relatively depression expectations and exist thankful if they exceed them.
There are many practiced resources to help Christians brand their selection. I would recommend the assessments produced by Christian Business organisation, The Christian Found, CARE, and the Evangelical Brotherhood . No matter what choice you make, accept the humility to realise that other brothers and sisters volition practise their wisdom in a different way.
It would exist piece of cake to be discouraged, but despite all the above I don't want to exist. This election is hyped as crucial to determine the time to come of the nation, but that is nonsense. Christians, of all people, know that our promise is not to be placed in politicians. Jesus is risen, ascended and ruling at God'due south right mitt. He holds the nations, including our ain, in his hand, and to him they are a drop in a saucepan (Is 40.15).
Any happens, the Bible assures u.s. that God is working out his good purpose to bring near the reconciliation of all things under Christ. In this age that might hateful our nation experiencing costly suffering, painful refining or even being handed over to ever escalating wickedness—or information technology might not.
This perspective ought to liberate united states of america to pray, decide and cast our vote without angst. The future does not remainder on our choice. If we prayerfully employ wisdom and make a choice with good conscience, we tin can leave the upshot to God. He is sovereign and I am non—which is skilful news.
I might want "none of the to a higher place"—just I can remainder confident in the dominion of the one who bears the name that is to a higher place all names, and whose ultimate victory is, despite all the current stance polls to the reverse, a forgone determination.
John Stevens studied police force at Cambridge and lecturer at the University of Birmingham before becoming pastor of Urban center Evangelical Church, Birmingham. Since 2010 he has been National Director of the Federation of Independent Evangelical Churches (FIEC).
If you enjoyed this, do share information technology on social media, mayhap using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo.Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my piece of work is done on a freelance basis. If yous have valued this postal service, would you considerdonating £1.20 a month to support the product of this blog?
If y'all enjoyed this, exercise share information technology on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my piece of work is washed on a freelance footing. If you have valued this mail, you lot can make a unmarried or echo donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Skillful comments that appoint with the content of the post, and share in respectful contend, tin add together real value. Seek outset to understand, then to be understood. Make the most charitable construal of the views of others and seek to larn from their perspectives. Don't view debate every bit a disharmonize to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/life-ministry/is-there-any-point-in-voting-in-the-election/
0 Response to "Is there any point in voting in the election?"
Post a Comment