POLITICS: The possible political position of non voters

I’M not ashamed to admit that I am politically ignorant. I think a lot of people are. What does concern me is the well-being of our country and its people, which is largely dependent on our government and our political system.

To know that less than 60% of registered voters chose to vote in the municipal elections on Wednesday, to me, represents a problem. However, to direct blame entirely towards the non voters and label them as apathetic or even as bad citizens lacking in civic duty, is not constructive in my books.

So in the spirit of constructive debate, it would be useful to put ourselves in the shoes of the non voters, so to speak, and try to better understand their possible position. In a country where political party posters are hidden in basements, polling stations are burnt to the ground, and violence is used to deter or instill fear in voters, one might understand where the non voters are coming from.

This is not an apathetic viewpoint of “my vote won’t make a difference”, but perhaps the idea that our democracy and political system, at least a significant part of it, is corrupt, and the chances of the voting process being tampered with are so high.

So how do we move forward and address this? It is undeniable that we live in a capitalist society which arguably creates a mentality of achievement, recognition and status. Being the president of the country or ‘high up’ in politics is no doubt a powerful position that comes with a large salary, prestige and numerous benefits.

It is arguable that entering this position from a less privileged position in society can have a profound effect on ones values. Egotism and ambition in the context of political power may manifest at the cost of principle. “Power breeds corruption” so the saying goes.

So I put it to you: if the prestige and prosperity that comes with being in a position of political power were defocused, would more politicians who are genuinely interested in leading on principle, not surface? Perhaps at the loss of those who are not?

With regards to the democratic voting process; in my philosophy, where there’s a queue, there’s room for improvement. Why are we not afforded the option to vote electronically? We all have unique fingerprints and computers are far more accurate and efficient at handling numbers as opposed to people. I understand that the major issue would be that an electronic system of some kind could be subject to being rigged or hacked, but is there really much difference in risk when voting with pen and paper?

Please excuse my ignorance. I am more than willing to be educated on such matters.

Daily Maverick article: Don't vote. It's your right

** More Opinion & Analysis Articles **

DEMOCRACY: And South Africa's political system

I have a friend; let’s call him Ken. Ken supports and believes in democracy, but refuses to vote. He is proudly South African, but does not support the South African political system.

In a country where political party posters are hidden in basements, polling stations are burnt to the ground, and violence is used to deter or instill fear in voters, I can see where Ken is coming from. This is not democracy or a democratic system.

This is not an apathetic viewpoint of “my vote won’t make a difference”, but rather the idea that our democracy and political system is corrupt and the chances of votes being tampered with are so high. Watch the news after voting day and I guarantee that you will hear or read about several cases of corruption.

Ken has an idea for democracy: electing a body of representatives from different sectors of society who regularly bring key decisions to the table and then offer these to the public to vote on. I believe the last civilization to really exercise a truly democratic system of this nature where the ancient Greeks with the senate. I understand that Swiss politics operates in a similar manner today.

No El Presidente. No single person with absolute power. If history is ANY guide, power corrupts, and no one man should ever be given so much power whose decisions affect everyone. We should be cautious of anything that is so powerful, even in a so-called democracy.

Spread the power. Give more people a stronger voice in politics. While we continue to endure a state of social and political evolution, there will always be differences and conflicts of interest. If one particular party with a particular agenda is elected, this evolution will be moulded in their favour. The voices and opinions of the public will be drowned out; at least until the next elections a few years down the line when this whole process happens again.

Part 2: The possible political position of non voters
Daily Maverick Article: Don't vote. It's your right

** More Opinion & Analysis Articles **

ANALYSIS: People, the media and the death of Osama bin Laden

Peter Joseph of the Zeitgeist movement sent out quite a hard hitting letter to it's members recently, which I though was worth sharing. It's certainly something to think about and he makes some very good points.

TZM: Response to Media; Death of Osama bin Laden

On May 1, 2011 President Barack Obama appeared on national television with the spontaneous announcement that Osama bin Laden, the purported organizer of the tragic events of September 11th 2001, was killed by military forces in Pakistan.

Within moments, a media blitz ran across virtually all television networks in what could only be described as a grotesque celebratory display, reflective of a level of emotional immaturity that borders on cultural psychosis. Depictions of people running through the streets of New York and Washington chanting jingoistic American slogans, waving their flags like the members of some cult, praising the death of another human being, reveals yet another layer of this sickness we call modern society.

It is not the scope of this response to address the political usage of such an event or to illuminate the staged orchestration of how public perception was to be controlled by the mainstream media and the United States Government. Rather the point of this article is to express the gross irrationality apparent and how our culture becomes so easily fixed and emotionally charged with respect to surface symbology, rather than true root problems, solutions or rational considerations of circumstance.

The first and most obvious point is that the death of Osama bin Laden means nothing when it comes to the problem of international terrorism. His death simply serves as a catharsis for a culture that has a neurotic fixation on revenge and retribution. The very fact that the Government which, from a psychological standpoint, has always served as a paternal figure for it citizens, reinforces the idea that murdering people is a solution to anything should be enough for most of us to take pause and consider the quality of the values coming out of the zeitgeist itself.

However, beyond the emotional distortions and tragic, vindictive pattern of rewarding the continuation of human division and violence comes a more practical consideration regarding what the problem really is and the importance of that problem with respect to priority.

The death of any human being is of an immeasurable consequence in society. It is never just the death of the individual. It is the death of relationships, companionship, support and the integrity of familial and communal environments. The unnecessary deaths of 3000 people on September 11, 2001 is no more or no less important than the deaths of those during the World Wars, via cancer and disease, accidents or anything else.

As a society, it is safe to say that we seek a world that strategically limits all such unnecessary consequences through social approaches that allow for the greatest safety our ingenuity can create. It is in this context that the neurotic obsession with the events of September 11th become gravely insulting and detrimental to progress. An environment has now been created where outrageous amounts of money, resources and energy is spent seeking and destroying very small subcultures of human beings that pose ideological differences and act on those differences through violence.

Yet, in the United States alone each year, roughly 30,000 people die from automobile accidents, the majority of which could be stopped by very simple structural changes. That's ten 9/11's each year... yet no one seems to pine over this epidemic. Likewise, over 1 million Americans die from heart disease and cancer annually - causes of which are now easily linked to environmental influences in the majority. Yet, regardless of the over 330 9/11's occurring each year in this context, the governmental budget allocations for research on these illnesses is only a small fraction of the money spent on “anti-terrorism” operations.

Such a list could go on and on with regard to the perversion of priority when it comes to what it means to truly save and protect human life and I hope many out there can recognize the severe imbalance we have at hand with respect to our values.

~ Peter Joseph (Response to Media; Death of Osama bin Laden)

GOOGLE WAVE: An analysis of its untimely downfall + Google Buzz

GOOGLE announced the closure of Google Wave on their blog on August 4 after much hype from loyal Google followers. There has been much buzz as to why Google Wave was a failed project, but the pivotal reasons appear to be three-fold. Excessive hype and expectations, too many features for a single web application, and at the same time, not enough unique features to differentiate Google Wave from existing services (Facebook, Twitter), all ultimately lead to its untimely downfall.

The hype involved a handful of people being invited to test Google Wave and lead to several bloggers discussing it amongst themselves. After almost a year of testing and a plethora of blog entries, a lot was obviously expected of Google’s latest brainchild. However, there were still only a handful of people that actually knew how to make use of Google Wave and in an era of short attention spans and click-happy web-users, the buzz had just about fizzled entirely upon its release.

The problem was that for the average Internet-user to get to grips with Google Wave required setting aside a good period of time to learn how to use it, and for many, watching a video tutorial was essential. Google’s software developers even admitted that the service “takes a little getting used to” and that even they were still learning how to use it themselves.

Once Google Wave invitees got the hang of Wave they needed more people to be using it besides themselves in order to get a proper wave going. This proved to be difficult enough in itself, but perhaps the problem was not a lack of users, but rather a lack of appeal.

What exactly is Google Wave?
“Wave's primary feature was to let users collaborate in real time, using an in-box-like interface that resembled a mix of Google's Gmail Web mail service, and its Docs and Spreadsheets product. Each strand of messages, which could include text, links, and photos, was called a wave. Google launched the product with an API for developers to build extra functionality in the form of extensions that users could turn on and off” - Cnet News

I would argue that Google Wave had two other inherent problems. The first being that it did not offer enough unique features – i.e. things that web-users couldn’t already perform using existing Google and other services, and secondly that it tried to achieve too much at once. There also seemed to be a lack of focus with regards to what the product would primarily be used for.

To rope people into any new web service takes time and requires baby steps if you want to get enough people on board in order for the services to be worthwhile and developed further. The web-user trend is to stick with what’s foremost familiar and secondly to make use of the tried and tested. Although Google Wave offered several easy ways to perform familiar tasks online in real-time, the popularity of services such as Facebook and Twitter far outweighed its demand as a new web service.

Google has brought many great apps to the table that are worthy of praise and the Internet would not be the same without them; sadly Google Wave was not one of them. Until a viable market demand is found, the focus should be on improving existing Google services before unleashing something new to the online public.

A bit on Google Buzz

Google had another chance with Google Buzz – a web app released just prior to Google Wave. For those who are unfamiliar with Google Buzz, the service is an extension of one’s Gmail account – appearing below one’s inbox. It can be rightfully argued that Google Buzz is essentially a Twitter clone as it allows friends to provide status updates, embed photos and links, and to follow or be followed by other Buzz users. It now has a few Facebooky features too – these being the options of liking or commenting on other users’ posts and embedding photos and video.

The idea was to discuss “the buzz”, but from many users’ experience the service seems to be primarily used as a promotional tool for embedding links and directing peoples’ attention to them. Facebook remains the popular choice for status updating and the sharing of photos and videos and Twitter is still the first choice for posting something of real value.

I do not imagine that Google Buzz will ever become as popular (or perhaps more importantly – more popular) than Twitter or Facebook – least not until it offers something different to what exists already. Buzz needs to be able to stand on it's own, which isn't currently happening with the ability to Buzz on Facebook or Buzz on Twitter.

Perhaps bloggers and Google Wave testers are largely to blame for the excessive hype and ultimate disappointment of Google Wave. Perhaps it was the product itself that asked too much of web users by way of time and practical use. Or perhaps Google Wave simply did not fill a need in the World Wide Web by offering something entirely unique and different.

Google can surely be forgiven for the failure of Google Wave and hopefully learn from their mistakes. With a history of so many other great services and the downfall of only a few, support for future developments should by no means be tainted by their recent faults. Keep the services coming Google; you ultimately never know what will work online until you try.

Sources:

• RIP Google Wave
• The official Google blog
• Google pulls plug on Google Wave
• Lessons Google Can Learn From Wave’s Failure

** More Opinion & Analysis Articles **

PROUDLY SOUTH AFRICAN: Doing good deeds since 1994

I NEARLY had a mental breakdown earlier this week when I lost an important leather file that contained: my ID book, passport, tax information, bank statements, my etchings and about 3 years worth of pay slips and all sorts of other documentation.

I had ill-mindedly placed the file on top of my car before heading to work and simply forgot about it. (I was running a little late). The file travelled atop my car for at least 3k's until I arrived at work and realised what had happened.

I sped back home and took the same route back to work – pleading to the Gods and Super Best Friends that I would come across my file laying on the road. No such luck. I could feel myself becoming quite constipated at this point.

Two hours later I got a phone call from an Indian gent who said he had found my file – laying on the side of the freeway! He was a minute away and personally came and dropped it off at my work.

The Good South African was in his mid-to-late 50s and wore a fisherman's beanie and sported some white stubble. He greeted me with a warm, grease-covered handshake. I assumed he was a mechanic and seemed to be in a hurry to get to a job, which added to his kindness of returning what had been lost and found.

Thank you fellow South African stranger! You have strengthened my faith in humanity and are a shining example of why South Africans are good people. I leave with you with a proudly South African pic to illustrate what a great country we live in.

Only in South Africa

Swembad Braai

** More Opinion & Analysis Articles **