On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.

18 11:59 AM

Submission to:

Panel Members of the British Columbia

Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform

555 W. Hastings Street

Vancouver BC V6B 4N6

On the Self-Corrupting Nature of Electioneering –

And a *Politic Alternative

by

Guy A. Duperreault, BGS, AScT

[deleted – contact information]

May 6, 2004
Rev January 12, 2009

*[In original, I had 'Democratic', here, but since reading Aristotle's The Politics, I now know that
our use of the word 'Democratic' is not quite in alignment with its original meaning. 'Properly,' a
democracy is that of governance by the poor. A plutocracy is governance by all, and an
oligarchy is governance by the wealthy. Keep this in mind when reading the following, that my
use of the word 'democracy' aligns with our common usage, but that that usage is an example of
Orwell's 'double-' or 'news-' speak. My society is in practice an oligarchy, not a democracy.]

Page 1 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

There are Three Malevolent Aspects of Electioneering

The failure of the parliamentary process due to corruption, and the eventual symptoms
of that failure, begin with the electoral process itself: by its structure, the process of
getting elected populates parliament with tainted goods, regardless the integrity and
honesty and goodness of the individuals entering the electioneering forum. There are
three endemically malevolent aspects of any electoral process built around
electioneering. They are: the roles of money, good intentions and power.

There are alternatives to the current voting system. After examining why a
government's failings begin long before power is won by and entrusted to the
"winning" party I suggest one that reduces all the significant corrupting influences of
our current voting system.

The First Malevolence

The first and most obvious electioneering malevolence is that it requires money to get
elected. While a party and its candidates may receive the majority of its funds from
John and Jane Canuck, the largest individual donations come from collectives, the
main ones being business and organized labour. Limiting the size of donations will
curtail this problem - but only as far as under-the-table perks and the promise of
lucrative post-government corporate appointments. These corporate collectives buy
the voice and obligation of the candidate and in the process mutes John and Jane
Canuck's democratic voice. This role of money in the voting process perverts any
democracy into an oligarchy.

The muted Canadian electorate is frustrated because its expressed distrust of big
business's apparent goal of Americanizing Canada and organized labour's apparent
goal of socializing Canada is not being heard by MP's, MLA's or city officials. Some
might say - especially the media! - that the news media are John and Jane's voice.
And maybe once they were. Unfortunately today's corporate media has, for the most
part, long since abdicated that important and difficult function for the easier role of
outing political "scandals", spouting inconsequential homilies about political parties
listening to the voter on election day, and selling stock portfolios and the value of
American-style "free" market economics. Their corporate ownership structure aligns it
with the beneficiaries of the oligarchy. The media is now a part of the oligarchy, and a
significant one.

Given the role money plays in getting elected, even the individual with the purest of
motivations and purest of hearts will eventually be faced with the well dramatized
ethical problem of choosing between doing what seems right and doing what is
expedient in getting or keeping power and/or wealth in order to achieve an even
greater vaguely defined good in some distant and tenuous future. The inherent
corruptibility of this situation is obvious: the short term "small" corruption of minor
consequence will be offset by the wonderful things that the honest, hardworking,
ambitious, good politician's hubris says power conferred on him or her will enable him

Page 2 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

or her to make manifest in a utopian future.

The Second Malevolence

The second malevolent aspect is the ostensibly "good" intention of wanting to do,
honestly and without self serving motivations, "good things." History and current
events demonstrate that more evil, death and corruption has been done on this planet
in the name of doing "good" than Marx ever ascribed to religion. When an individual
or group is convinced that they are doing something for the greater good, be it for
one's God, race, country or economy, the end will frequently be used justify the means.
In the name of "good" children are beaten to death, "pro-lifers" kill, "pacifist" religions
authorize death and torture, "socialist" rulers initiate genocidal pogroms and
"democratically elected" governments take their armaments into undemocratic
countries to fix their elections. In the name of "good" we have had the Spanish
Inquisition, Hitler's "Jewish Solution", the Vietnam War, and Canada's past policy of the
cultural genocide of aboriginal peoples.

And while the good-hearted people we send into seats of power may not orchestrate
the death of millions, the desire to do good can and does lead people to accept or
tolerate varying levels of corruption as a necessary evil for the sake of doing the good
deed they promise themselves they are there to do. Acceptance of the questionable
actions is almost always well rationalized and/or justified, of course. An ongoing
example is that of various governments choosing to deal with their/our monetary
crunch by initiating various types of gambling schemes, despite gambling's
documented "bad" side effects. (It is interesting to note that, if memory serves me
correctly, gambling as a means to supplement tax revenue has been rejected by the
majority of Canadians in poll after poll, and at least once by referendum in British
Columbia. For those people who advocate a government bound to referenda, I pose
this questions: Would politicians actually listen to referenda results which went
counter to their desire to do good deeds and the "right" thing - such as protecting the
ignorant voter from the folly of making a bad choice on a particular referendum?)

And a particularly poisonous form of "good-intentionitis" is when the politician

"knows" better than the voter what is good for the voter. In this form of condescension
the politician can block out the concerns of his or her constituents and espouse with a
clear conscious the most mellifluous of double-speaks. Gordon Campbell's
referendum on treaty negotiations is a recent example, and ably demonstrates that
direct democracy, such as described by Douglas Broome, can be at best a post hoc
bandage and at worst a tool of false democracy.

The Third Malevolence

The third malevolent aspect of the electoral process is a subtle twist of the previous:
the appeal of power tends to, in general but with just enough exceptions to prove the
rule, draw to it those who are: a) least capable of handling it well and, b) the easiest to
corrupt.

This aspect relates to how the underlying temper of motivation within the hidden

Page 3 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

chambers of the individual's heart, and not just his or her broadcasted smiles full of
bright teeth, wide eyes, purity and integrity, eventually reveals itself in the actions of
that person.

The compulsive power seeker is often expressing some psychological need, a need
not dissimilar in structure from any addictive need, even if it is expressed differently
than the typically self destructive behaviour of the alcoholic, junkie, of coke-head. In
the clever power seeker this character flaw can be effectively masked and rewarded
as willingness to sacrifice family and health for long hours of getting results. On the
surface, s/he looks self sacrificing but in truth this type of power seeker is
narcissistically out to get just even an bit more power, so that all choices and actions
are weighed by their ability to get the next hit of power. The recent publications about
the sociopathic, or even psychopathic nature of chief executive officers, give concrete
form to this argument.

Wanted: A Politician with a Small Ego

The insurmountable difficulty here is in finding a politician whose ego is wise enough
by being small enough to know the difference between a small corruption and a big
one - with the added spice that those with the best intentions, biggest aspirations, and
largest egos generally tolerate the largest corruptions. Nixon and VanderZalm are
excellent examples of this, each denying inappropriate behaviour even after having
their hands caught inside the metaphorical cookie jar. But so are the NDP, who were
far more effective when their ego was content at being simply the conscience and
voice of John and Jane Canuck in parliament than after they deemed it important to
get elected so as to be able to do really good things.

But if we do not vote them in, how can a "democratic" government

be formed?

Make Governance A Selection Process, Akin to Jury Duty

I suggest that we replace electioneering with a sophisticated lottery process not
dissimilar in principle from the jury selection process. Eliminating elections would
effectively destroy the three malevolent aspects of the electioneering process I
discussed above in the following ways: "Candidates" would not begin their term pre-
bought; the random nature of the lottery would minimize both the number of people
drawn to power simply to feel powerful and those ambitious "do-gooders" who are
inherently prone to corruption and constituency deafness; double-speak would no
longer be necessary to keep a good face forward or to mollify pre-election "bad" press.

This would not eliminate the "crook" from politics, of course, for crooks are a part of
society: but the structure itself would not be inherently corrupt, nor encourage
corruption, because no one would begin office being beholden to anyone or to an

Page 4 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

egoistically generated and dangerous ambition from the first day of office.
Furthermore, broad corruption requires collusion that, without "bought" parties, would
be very difficult to initiate let alone maintain.

Four Other Serendipitous Benefits

Firstly it is Democratic [actually, plutocratic]

Serendipitously this form of government selection has four other very significant
benefits. The first is that it is truly democratic! All people (with certain minimum years
of education/work/experience, age, and residency status) would be eligible: thus the
sexes, races, religions and classes would all be represented proportionally as they
exist in Canada. (Like today, unfortunately, the poor and homeless would have a hard
time getting representation. However, they may well be heard more clearly when the
government is not bound to corporate American economic ideals which have rendered
the poor our expendable economic - not social! - failures.)

Secondly, House Votes are "Free" Votes

Secondly, almost every vote in the houses would likely be a free vote, and no longer
would there be wasted verbiage in the press and in the house about them.

Thirdly is the Elimination of Electioneering

Thirdly, an enormous amount of costly and mostly puerile word-waste would be
eliminated because the need for dissembling political posturing and silly verbal
fencing to gain political points rather than assist in the running of the country would be
gone. And, not insignificantly, it would eliminate the wanton waste associated with
electioneering, i.e., advertising, and the inane but endless media spectacles and
speculations. But the media could still root happily around for scandal!

Fourthly is that It Honestly Recognizes the True Nature of Governance

Finally (in this short list), since governing is an odious task it is not insignificant that,
like jury duty, the task of governing be aligned with that fact, and not with glamour,
prestige and Barnum and Bailey-like showmanship and the hope and thrill of shilling
the paying customer.

While Not Without Flaws, It is Not Malevolent by Inherent Design

And while this government selection process has its flaws, unlike our current system it
is not malevolent by design to the majority it is suppose to be governing while
benefiting those few with money. And there are ways of minimizing even some of the
most obvious flaws, such as using some form of direct democracy as per Harvey
Schachter and Douglas Broome. In this case, direct democracy would not be trying to
counteract inherent corruption, but would be a vehicle to give the population an
immediate voice in choosing between the various policy and social options.

Page 5 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

Some Other Points to Consider

In point form, here are a few other ideas that might increase the effectiveness of a
"government-by-selection-lot".

1. Education is Important
Beyond some kind of minimum education and/or work experience and residential
qualifications, have those selected attend intensive schooling for a year, more or less,
to balance their areas of familiarity with a broader look at history, the humanities,
literature. (This would be the opportunity to give those selected and qualified
"memory", as it is described by John Ralston Saul.) Follow that by six months of study
of domestic and/or international affairs, as per the experience and qualifications of the
"candidates." Follow this by six months time to rest from schooling and work to give
the "candidates" time to be with their families and thoughts in a significant way before
serving a long term. To accommodate attrition during this process, begin with more
candidates than seats in the house - about ten percent, say. These people, if not
actually sitting at the opening of parliament, become alternates during the course of
the term.)

2. Cabinet Members are Chosen, the Unsuitable Thanked and Let Go

During the education process those most suitable for the equivalent of cabinet posts
would make themselves known, as would those suitable for some form of senate - as a
place of reflection and second thought. Additional or extended education and/or direct
experience would be "foisted" onto them. And those not at all suitable to govern would
be thanked for their time and let go.

3. A Tour of Duty is a Minimum of Seven Years - With Reviews

The duty term be made for not less than seven years. Some kind of "direct democracy
review" could be done after three years and thereafter bi-annually, for example.

4. For Continuity, The End of a Tour of Duty Doesn't Include Everyone

After the seven year term is done, have only two thirds of the people retire out of
government. A secret ballot at the end of year six is held in which, perhaps, each
parliamentarian chooses one hundred people as being suitable for continued action in
government. Here also direct democracy could have a place, as the population in
general would also choose those people they feel would be best to stay in
government. They too could pick one hundred names. The top thirty to fifty names
would then serve a second term. This kind of arrangement allows for change, but
recognizes the value of some form of continuity. Any form of electioneering by anyone
to be one of those selected is punishable by not less than having his or her name
crossed off the list of those eligible for a second term.

5. Salaries Linked to A Member's Previous Employment

Salaries for the representatives would be at 10-20% above the wage/salary they

Page 6 of 7
On Electoral Reform - R2009.12.18.rtf 09.12.18 11:59 AM

would have earned in their current work/career, plus some expense money. This
addresses the concern about getting "qualified" people into government and links the
cost of government personnel to "market" prices. Wage increases and pensions would
be similarly linked to the work world.

6. Creative Genius May be Granted at Least a Tiny Plot of Fertile Parliamentary

Ground
While structured, this "system" gives creative genius a reasonable shot of being
expressed without it being stifled by a structure thoroughly wedded to mediocrity and
corruptibility (to paraphrase John Ralston Saul).

Bibliography

Aristotle. Politics and Poetics. Books the Second and Third.

Broome, Douglas. "Saturday Review", The Vancouver Sun, Sept. 21, 1996)

Saul, John Ralston. The Unconscious Civilization. Concord, Ont.: House of Anansi
Press Limited, 1995.

Schachter, Harvey. The Globe and Mail, Sat. Apr. 19, 1997 D3.

Page 7 of 7