Isms

Explore

Gallery

Isms

Azadism Vs Democracy

Should Sikhs Vote?

Looking into the "Paradox of Voting", whether or not Sikhs should vote (IMO) and who I recommend if you are going to.

By Ranjit Singh

⁠

Paradox of Voting

What is the “Paradox of Voting”?

The paradox of voting, also known as Downs' paradox after economist Anthony Downs, refers to a problem in public choice theory that questions why rational individuals would vote in large elections (like the UK elections coming up 🇬🇧) The paradox arises because the probability of any single vote influencing the outcome of an election is extremely low, making the personal cost of voting (time, effort, etc.) seem to outweigh the potential benefits. Despite this, many people do vote, which may appear irrational from a strictly economic perspective where an assumption is made that people generally act in their own self-interest (see Section I of the Azadist Manfiesto). Here are some key points outlining the paradox:

Main components of this paradox

[01] Rational Choice Theory

According to rational choice theory, individuals make decisions by weighing the costs and benefits. In the context of voting, the costs include the time and effort spent to vote, while the benefits are the impact of the individual's vote on the election outcome and the subsequent policies that affect the voter.

[02] Probability of Influence

In large elections, the likelihood that a single vote will be decisive is minuscule. This low probability means that the expected benefit of voting, when calculated as the probability of being decisive multiplied by the benefit of the preferred candidate winning, is almost zero.

[03] Costs of Voting

The costs of voting, though relatively small (e.g., time taken to register, travel to the polling station, time spent voting), are non-zero. When these costs are compared to the near-zero expected benefit, rational choice theory would suggest that voting is not a rational action. I.e. the impact you have on the overall vote doesn't seem to justify the cost to you physically going and putting in a vote.

⁠

So why do people vote?

[01] Altruism and Civic Duty

Many individuals vote because they feel a sense of civic duty or altruism. They believe that voting is a moral or social obligation, regardless of the direct impact of their vote.

[02] Social Pressure and Identity

Voting can be influenced by social pressures and personal identity. People might vote because it is expected by their community or because they identify strongly with a particular political group.

[03] Expressive Voting

Some theorists suggest that individuals derive intrinsic satisfaction from the act of voting itself. Voting allows individuals to express their support for a candidate or policy, which can be rewarding even if the vote does not change the outcome.

[04] Minimax Regret

This theory suggests that voters act to minimize their potential regret. If an election is close and the voter did not vote, they might regret not participating, especially if their preferred candidate loses by a narrow margin.

⁠

Should Sikhs Vote?

Firstly, this sort of question hints at the very root of the problem with democracy itself. Whilst I may suggest and offer arguments as to why others may do this or that, if I were given the ultimate authority to mandate things regardless of consent - you would rightly call that tyranny. You may think, “oh doesn’t democracy solve that”. No, not quite. All democracy does is give ultimate authority to a majority... but there still is a centralised political will imposed on everyone regardless of consent. Even if you did not vote, you will be subject to the mandates of the winners. The key term here is consent, and it is the reason why Azadism considers state-level democracy (where decisions are made that affect all in the state involuntarily) unethical. Without adequate restrictions on what can and can’t be subjected to a vote (like a Republic is meant to be for, via a constitution assuring various rights), the whole population is subject to the mandates of whatever the majority says (or more accurately, whoever represents the majority will). But no group of representatives can accurately cater towards the conflicting demands of every citizen, especially with the size of states these days. These days it feels like a system of choosing our abuser, as most parties today parade on social issues, but economically, they operate very similarly. They all increase the size of government, print money, and impose a myriad of ridiculous taxes, whilst the elites are able to bribe their way into immunity and the decision-makers can pocket a nice sum offshore via their own hidden schemes.

Democracy relies on breaking consent and disrespecting an individual’s self-autonomy. In the absence of a sound constitution, this is all a sophisticated version mob-rule, that lets the most degenerate liars and manipulators rise to the top and demagogues guide the whims of the people.

So, therefore, just like all the outputs of Bunga Azaadi, the author speaks for themselves and themselves only, and does not attempt to force people. I only offer suggestions and explain my opinion in the hope that it may help others reach their own conclusions. If you reach different ones, that is fine! So long as you do not use violence to impose your decision on others - unlike a democracy (dictatorship of the majority) does.

Civic Duty or Nationalism?

The first theory trying to explain the paradox of voting suggests that it is out of altruism or civic duty. However, I believe there is a larger Nationalism / Patriotism aspect that also gives an incentive to people in this regard. The concept of nationalism is a fairly new idea in human history, and it is a uniquely post-colonial European invention. I will write about this in more depth in future, but for now, as a Sikh, we should ask ourselves who are we nationalistic for? Are we even pro-nationalism at all? I am personally not so sure, so this argument for why I should vote doesn’t really hold up that well.

I will traverse to wherever the opportunity is. Currently, it is in the west, but this may change. Why should I be attached to a single nation-state, especially since the Khalsa is taught to be Chakarvarti?

However, an important caveat is that we should try our best to make positive change wherever we are, whilst we are where we stand. I don’t believe voting is the best vehicle for change given our minority, but something like entrepreneurship is. And this can be beyond borders.

Social Peer Pressure

In our community in the UK, it seems to not only be expected of us to vote despite the fact that we a minority, but also vote Labour. After looking into the core tenants of the Labour Party, it is completely antithetical to both Azadism and my personal understanding of Sikhi. Yet, the Conservative party is not much better either. To sum it up briefly for here: Labour are clueless about economics, and Tories are hypocrites. Both are trending towards authoritarianism in practice. The real shame is that all other parties are considered as non-options, so its an illusion of choice really. This “social pressure” factor, in general, irks me since the Khalsa is not characterised by a passive nature of following others blindly (at least it shouldn’t, many who don the appearance of the Khalsa unfortunately do though). Democracy and voting is the system and activity of sheep. Do the Khalsa participate in sheep activity?

Niyara Khalsa

You might "oh if everyonee thought that way…" NO! The Khalsa isn't everyone though (“Hum Akaali Sab Ke Vali, Humra Panth Niyara Hai...”). The Khalsa is by definition against the grain. There is always going to be a natural tendency within those who adopt the Khalsa spirit to walk the opposite way. Even just for the sake of being Niyara if nothing else! Not a very "civilian" attitude, I know, but the Khalsa was never designed to be.

However…

HOWEVER, that being said, there is a time and a place for this attitude to pronounce itself so unapologetically. Then there are other times where we have to keep a “grander strategy” in mind. The above mindset is addictive and absolutely necessary in the right contexts. But if we as a Panth want to play the long game, we have to do a bit of "ju-jitsu'. Compromise. Give some ground to take a lot later. Otherwise, don't complain about not winning when you refuse to play the game. Can't butt our heads and become stubborn against every situation. It is okay to lose a few battles so that you may win the "war". It is this type of wisdom that is revealed in Guru Gobind Singh's Charitaropakhyaan (such as the Charitar of Beer Datt, see a previous post on this).

⁠

So will I vote?

I am not sure whether I want to legitimise this system of sheep choosing their shepherd by voting. It is like saying I disagree with factory farming of animals, then going to McDonalds for Big Mac. Neither do I believe voting will make much of a difference to the core issues I care about, especially when the only two real options I have here in the UK are both complicit in exacerbating these issues. Instead, I think if Sikhs really want to change policies in our favour (as well as the benefit of all), we should look at how power really works. What do you think corporations do when they want something done? Go to the ballot box? No. They go direct for the politicians, cash in hand. Whilst lobbying would be banned in an Azadist system, we are not yet living in such a system. Therefore, we may need to use the tools of today to help progress us towards that future ideal. Lobbying may be one of them - and currently, given the duopoly we have, both parties are “trading in this market”.

But If You Had To?

If I am going to vote, I will in all likelihood vote for the Libertarian Party (not to be confused with Liberal Democrats!). It is the only party that I have come across with a manifesto that makes sense and builds up from a sound foundation in economics. If UK Sikhs were more aware of basic economics and savvy in their politics, we could vote as a bloc for this party (IMO). Although our population is small, it would be relatively larger (and therefore more valuable) for smaller independent parties than it is for the larger ones. It would mean a whole lot more to them, and this yields a greater leverage and loyalty… Somewhat. We are talking about modern democracies after all. Electoral politics is a dirty game. It is a system where the worst get on top, as it is designed to select for those who are best able to lie and cheat their way to the top. Those whose ambitions are pure rarely ever get that far with this, especially those who actually have nuanced and intelligent positions. Because this requires a deeper level of thinking, which the voting masses either do not have nor want to have (or have the time to learn - not always their fault). Instead, it is those who are best able to capture the hearts of people through rhetoric, rather than reason, who succeed in this arena.

Demagoguery noun Political activity or practices that seek support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument.

This is perhaps why parties like the Libertarian Party have so far been unsuccessful. It tells people what they need to hear, not necessarily what they want to hear. Nevertheless, if Sikhs do support such parties, then it gives us more representation with however many seats they manage to secure. Alongside this, Sikhs should also be joining parties as members, and become MPs, Councilors, Mayors etc. of all the parties - so long as loyalty is first and foremost to the Sikhs and the Guru Khalsa Panth. Saying that though, whilst we should most definitely hold Sikh politicians accountable, we also need to understand they are playing a game and be patient with them. It is not always strategic to push certain agendas in every instance. Timing is important, and the public isn’t always privy to the information they have either. That being said, Bunga Azaadi is also always open to sitting with Sikh politicians and discussing Azadism with them (get in touch!). Whilst they can publicly support certain ideologies, like socialism for Labor MPs, behind the scenes they could learn about Sikhi-based economic ideologies and gradually push for policies in line with that within their respective parties over time. We can work out the exact strategies to do this together.

So Will I Vote?

So I am not sure if I will vote yet. I would be interested in hearing your views on the subject, and see if anyone can persuade me either way. Regardless, I do not expect my salvation to come through a new set of autocrats. Voting won't solve most of the problems we face. No one can save you but YOU, your local Sangat and your relationship with your Guru. In terms of influencing change, I think there are more effective and creative ways we as descendants of the Guru and the wisdom collected in their Anandpur Darbars can come up with. Bunga Azaadi is available for some of this, in the ways mentioned earlier in this piece. Just requires those interested to make the effort.

⁠

For a more detailed Azadist critique of democracy, read

Azadism Vs Democracy⁠