Universal suffrage is a very recent conquest in the millennial history of humanity. In fact, the right to vote for certain ethnic minorities in some countries, and that of women in the vast majority, is – on average – less than a century old. For example, in Spain women’s suffrage was recognized in 1933, during the Second Republic (before falling into a long silence, until the recovery of democracy), in France in 1944, before that, in Russia (1917) or the United States (1920). In any case, the right to vote – and be voted for – in free elections is an essential, and long-desired, feature of democratic societies. This right has been so desired that most countries have not considered it necessary to establish the obligation to exercise it. In fact, compulsory suffrage is exceptional and is valid in only about twenty countries, including Belgium, Greece or Luxembourg in the European Union.
However, it is a peculiar right, a historical privilege that entails a singularity, the obligation to be used, either by legal imperative or – more commonly – by civic imperative, by social responsibility. Advanced democracies provide us with a significant, and growing, number of rights, and they only require of us two things: first, that we respect the laws, particularly tax rules, that contribute to their maintenance, and, second, , that we freely elect our representatives, voting when we are called, as is the case next Sunday.
In Spain, as in other democratic countries, there are important challenges that our society must face: the unbearable increase in inequalities, the risk of poverty for a significant part of the child and adolescent population, the fight against climate change, the 2030 agenda, European construction, the wear and tear of our young welfare state, territorial diversity, the polarization and hatred that some political groups stimulate… Faced with this, a powerful tool at our disposal ( the most powerful) is to vote for the political option that seems most capable of dealing with these challenges, or those that each citizen considers the most relevant.
No matter how little we reflect, we will agree that not all political options, nor all political protagonists, are the same, that disregard for politics is a mistake and, above all, that not voting is a dysfunctional and sterile way of doing politics, still be it implicitly. And given the solemnity of our civic obligation to vote, alleging discomfort over the dates (“the murga de votar” that Fernando Ónega recently and sensibly referred to) does not seem very consistent. In fact, there are close precedents in our country, those of the democratic elections in Galicia and the Basque Country three years ago, in July 2020.
Four final considerations:
1) Exemplary behavior must be demanded of all candidates, that they act with respect and good manners in relations with adversaries. All this as proof of the consideration due to the voters of all parties without any exception. Therefore, beyond the programs, it is essential to assess the personality of the candidates, especially their credibility, that is, their moral authority. The widespread lack of credibility causes the discredit of politics.
2) Given the importance of the right to vote to identify us as full citizens, whatever is necessary should be done to recognize it to those thousands of fellow citizens who pay their taxes on time and who face such absurd bureaucratic hurdles (and so undemocratic) such as the requirement of reciprocity with the country of origin, a requirement that it is not within their power to satisfy and which, on many occasions, has some relation to their migratory impulse. In this sense, it is ironic to remember that, when suffrage had not reached universality, the right to vote was restricted to citizens who owned property or those who paid taxes continuously, limitations that they overcame not without effort.
3) The damage caused to the democratic system by the malfunctioning of the parties, when these have as their sole purpose the interest of their leaders and militants, who must never forget that they are not the owners of the parties, but only the managers . It is the voters who breathe life into the parties. That is why primaries restricted to militants are a debatable resource.
4) All coalition governments that have been formed so far, or that will be formed in the future with parties that are within the law, have been presented in the elections and have representatives in Parliament, are and will be legitimate. What is different is whether or not they are convenient for the general interests, which will depend on the policies these parties propose. But precisely because they are all legitimate (be they a coalition or a legislative pact with right-wing, left-wing or separatist extremists), the generic disqualifications with which, of sometimes, some hard-working defenders of the strictest democratic purity, self-appointed implacable judges, stigmatize some party that… makes them ugly. Simply because it doesn’t suit them. Everything else, words. Foliage
TRACE AND PEACE, made up of Jordi Alberich, Eugeni Bregolat, Eugeni Gay, Jaume Lanaspa, Juan-José López Burniol, Carles Losada, Josep Lluís Oller, Alfredo Pastor, Xavier Pomés and Víctor Pou
