(For non-Irishfolk - The EU wants to update its constitution, because its current constitution is the same as it was when the EU was created forty years ago, which then was comprised of about a third of the countries it now is, and the nature of these countries was rather different to the nature of the countries now. But this 'Lisbon treaty,' as the change is called, if accepted will involve a change to the Irish constitution (a very small change, as it happens; the change is to allow the Lisbon treaty to take effect), and every change to the Irish constitution must be agreed upon by popular vote; so today, there is a referendum. Although it is common-sense that the constitution of a body such as the EU must be updated when its make-up is substantially changed, a lot of Irish people are unhappy with the particular changes that are involved. As such, whether or not the treaty will be accepted is something of a toss-of-the-coin.)
I know almost nothing of the particulars of the Lisbon treaty. Although I am inclined to one side at the moment, I know that, given a couple hours to sit down with it, or the impartial guide we've all been given in the post, or with some newspapers, etc., I would change my mind, probably five times over. I have not, despite the best efforts of the government, Libertas, and the media to make life easy for me, taken the time to inform myself about the treaty. If I were to vote, I would be voting out of what I've managed to glean from rhetoric and soundbites; I would be voting by what 'seems' right; I would be voting from an emotional response to the polemic of advocates of either side. I do not feel that I would be voting; I would be expressing the opinion of the person who is the best orator, and who has been the most recent to shout his or her case at me. Such does not give me an informed opinion, such that I ought to change the balance of the outcome of the referendum.
The roots of democracy, if my history is right, is interesting. It started, of course, in Athens. There, the franchise was anything but universal: only Athens-born male landowners over the age of thirty could vote. When democracy became popular in the West a few thousand years later, the franchise had a similarly narrow scope. I don't want to defend this, or even many of its justifying reasons, but one reason I do want to defend, and lament that it is lost.
The few people that did have the vote then were, at least ostensibly, well-educated; moreover, they were deemed to have the time to educate themselves on political matters. Whether or not this was actually the case is probably controversial but beside my point in any case; the point is that democracy was legitimated by the belief that the ruling demos was not a rabble, voting how they had been made to vote through emotional manipulation; they were a thoughtful, educated and rational demos, who voted, not only with a good knowledge of the issues involved, but of the broader theoretical and philosophical issues that went into the arguments they were hearing from various advocates. I think that this is admirable. To be sure, I still prefer universal democracy, because it carries with it the implicit recognition of every person as of equal worth; and our right to vote is surely an honour and a hard-won privilege; but it doesn't follow from that that we should always use it. We should recognise that sometimes, we are the mob whose rule political philosophers since Plato have rightly feared; and if we share that fear, as certainly I do, it is absurd to help bring it closer to reality by (for all we know) voting it in!
Certainly, we should make the effort to educate ourselves in matters on which we have the privilege to vote; but if, for lack of interest, competence or time, we cannot or will not educate ourselves, then we should know when to be silent. When we do not know how to vote for lack of information, then perhaps spoiling our vote may be in order; but in this instance, at least, we can hardly complain about that. To put all this in another way, with rights come responsibilities; and with the right to vote comes the responsibility to use your vote wisely and - well, responsibly. If you neglect your responsibilities - as I have done - the only decent thing to do is to waive your right.
I am an awful elitist - the best form of democracy seems to me to be weighted universal voting. Every man, woman and child gets a vote, but the well-educated get a disproportionate share of the vote. And this is appalling and all the rest of it; but at least I can't be accused of hypocrisy.
-James Camien