Cameroon: Questions and Answers on Vote Sizing
(10 votes)
Julius Awafong recently answered questions put to him by a group of Cameroonian student, about the necessity and applicability of Vote Sizing in Africa, Cameroon in particular
Question - What is VOTE SIZING all about?
JA: - VOTE SIZING starts by questioning the origin of corruption in a democracy. And we look at corruption to mean two things coming together. These two things are the fundamental value systems that we have put in place to guide us through our living together in a peaceful, secured, harmonious and evolving society. So VOTE SIZING starts by asking some questions:
3) Do those who really suffer from the consequences of a failing election and its various outcomes (who are the poor, working and middle class people and who constitute the majority) – right? Do they concretely have the necessary resources to stand up and push back the tide of corruption that’s rendering them miserable and making their children look that those born in a coffin?
So VOTE SIZING says that, we need to overhaul or turn up-side-down our democratic machinery so that during elections, peoples’ votes will be sized comparatively to their payslips or paycheques. And with this, more weight will be given to the votes of those who earn less and vice versa thereby putting back the total control of government into the hands of those who really face the consequences of corruption.
Question - Isn’t that Undemocratic?
When the founding fathers of democracy thought of this idea, I think they solidly meant the wellbeing of the majority of the people and from that time we have come across so many ‘vehicles’ of democracy and with the latest being 1-person 1-vote.
So I think that “1 person 1 vote”, just like VOTE SIZING, is not democracy but a means to achieve democracy, which is, the wellbeing of the people – the majority of course.
Now, another analogy! Imagine that you are travelling from Yaounde to Mamfe, and you are ignorant about the nature of the road – right? Now you hire a little nice car which you start-off with on the nice tarred roads – Okay?
By the time you get closer to Mamfe, you discover a challenging nightmare, and that is, the road. Now you say to yourself, “I hope this car can get me through because it is the best I can get.” Believe me, you will end up in that road for the rest of your life without reaching Mamfe except you look for a powerful and heavy 4WD car.
Now take, MAMFE to be “DEMOCRACY”, the small car to be “1-Person 1-Vote” and the 4WD car to be VOTE SIZING and you will understand me better.
Women going to farm with their hoes and food, Mbambalang, Ndop, NWP, Cameroon, March 2008.
Question - Isn’t that punishing the successful wealthy people?
JA: - Yeah, that’s the argument the rich are going to put and they will say they deserve equal vote just like the poorer guys do. My questions are:
1) Does this argument carry any element of sacrifice?
2) How do wealthy guys legally make money? Do they get this money by plugging it trees?
3) Isn’t it the poorer employees who work extremely hard to help them get the money which “crown” them as “successful”?
4) By the way, why do you say wealthy people are successful when they devour far more, squander far more and pollute far more than the rest of us?
5) Why are people who consume, waste and pollute less, regarded as lazy and less successful?
6) So America which is today, the atmosphere’s highest polluter and which vehemently refused to sign the Kyoto protocol should be regarded successful than a country covered with forest and with no industries?
I think we shouldn’t promote the idea that success means more wealth and more power because we will never ever succeed in curbing the uncontrollable amount embezzlement, corruption, strikes, including employees strikes, highway robbery, or “coupeurs de routes” and the list is too long.
upstation Hill, Bamenda, NWP, Cameroon, August 2008.
Question - Isn’t Vote Sizing preaching some kind of unfairness?
JA: - Going back to the aspect of fairness and unfairness again,
1) Do you think it is fair for a minority to have all the wealth and all the power over government?
2) Is it fair for people in their majority to live without a good health facility, without good schools, without good drinking water, with very minimal salaries, without electricity, and with their children born into poverty with no opportunity to ever get out of it?, while a minority enjoys in an abusive abundance, using portable water to water their flowers, “petrol allowance” to fuel their cars, enough money to run to any European or American hospital when they feel just a little headache, with their children born in abundance wealth and attending Ivy League or expensive universities around the world?
What annoys some people is that while the poorer majority lives on less than half a dollar per day, some people spend hundred of thousands just to beautify their garden, feed their pets, and electrify their neighbourhood already filled with security guards.
Bafoussam, West Province, Cameroon, August, 2008.
Question - What makes you think that giving poorer people more voting power will not simply give them the power to crush down the rich and take away their wealth?
JA:- Let me give an analogy,
Two politicians D and F go out for campaign:
- D tells the voters, “Vote for me and I’m gonna give you lot of money, I’m gonna give you all my money”!
- F on his turn says, “if you vote for me, I’m gonna listen to your problems and I’m gonna streamline government to reduce corruption, I’m gonna make sure you have potable water, good roads, good and well equipped health centres and good schools with teachers for your children etc”.
Who do you think the electorates are going to elect?
Historically, this is not the first democratic reform. When women won their voting right, they didn’t suddenly take over become men.
When blacks in America won their voting power from zero to 2/3 and to a full vote, they didn’t become whites.
So why do you think poorer and working middle class people will suddenly become wealthy if giving more voting power?
Tatum, Bui Division, entering Ndu, in Donga Mantung Division, NWP, Cameroon, March 2008.
Question - If properly monitored, why don’t you think "1-person 1-vote" can be used by the poorer majority to out-vote the wealthy who are apparently very small in number?
JA:- That’s a powerful one.
The word “If” in your question means something is wrong and that’s why it cannot be properly managed. So what’s makes it not to be properly managed?
You know, the greatest problem in a democracy is that, everybody has the same amount of vote but not everybody has the same amount of power. So we are bound to remain in a system where some people with their economic power grab more political power and vice versa, which breeds corruption and misery.
So I think that the reason why the poorer majority will always be surprise of the use and impact of their votes, is because, the wealthy, though in their minority, have already set-up legal and illegal mechanisms at work, which just cremates or reduces to ashes that one vote of theirs.
What do you mean by legal and illegal mechanics?
Hmmm gerrymandering, amendment of the constitution, being a player, referee and game staff at the same time, that’s legal and illegal we talk of vote buying, media propaganda, threats and others.
Yaounde, Cameroon, 2008.
Question - Now that the wealthy have become so powerful. Does VOTE SIZING have a chance?
JA:- In the history of empires, any empire that refused to listen to good ideas easily collapsed.
Germany collapsed because Hitler thought of conquering the world and keeping all the power for themselves.
Ben Laden could easily bomb down the twin towers in Manhattan because Americans thought they were so powerful to point where they forgot they were contrarily, very very weak and porous.
The late Mobutu of the former Zaire, Idi Amin of Uganda and Charles Taylor of Liberia, just to name this few, and not forgetting other tyrants around the world today, were or are not indifferent.
Milesovich was one time very powerful but where is he today? He is a mere inmate.
Coming finally to Cameroon, CEO’s, Honourables, Excellencies, and wealthy guys who used their wealth to grab more political which pushed them embezzlement, are today mare inmates in most major rehabilitation centres, not to use the word ‘prison’, in Cameroon.
So looking at the wealthy, and I prefer illegally wealthy guys, as very powerful, is a façade. They look very powerful, but concretely and with all honesty, it is the beginning of their collapse and also that of our societies and to an extent, the world at large. The unfortunate thing is that the poorer majority, suffers most from the all the acts perpetrated by these tyrants and yet nothing is being done to stop it.
Mbouda, West Province, Cameroon, August 2008.
Question - Practically tell us how VOTE SIZING can be carried out.
JA:- Today if technology can enable us travel even to the moon, enable us to easily manage our finances, easily secure our bank accounts, easily carry out money transfers in a secured manner or even carry the whole world’s money in just one little card called credit card or even telephone call cards, I think it is very reasonable and normal for us to equally use it to manage our voting system.
First, we start with ballot papers; it is the best VOTE SIZING can propose.
In Canada, a ballot paper carries the all parties or candidates we are voting for. We just tick on our choice, and then cast our ballot paper into the ballot box.
The only addition from VOTE SIZING is that, each voter’s ballot paper has a tear-off section that carries both his/her identification number and a bar code that represents his/her income.
For confidentiality, only the identification section is found on the tear-off section while the barcode is found on both the tear-off and the section that’s to be put in the ballot box.
After casting, each paper ballot passes through a scanner, connected to a computer that reads our barcode, sees our income and gives an inverse size of vote to the party or candidate we are voting for.
There is a special formula that the computer uses to calculate this.
If we are in America, the riches guy according to Forbes magazine will find his vote weighing zero while the street guy or the guy who earns zero dollar, will have his vote weighing the fullest, - let say 1.
With this, we are giving back government which is the only viable tool to fight all forms of social vices, to those who are most affected by these vices. That is what we call democracy.
Ndu, Donga Mantung; NWP, Cameroon, March 2008.
Question – Do you think everybody should be concerned about Vote Sizing?
JA:- It’s a challenge, and I will like to say that it’s a wake up call for both the rich and the poor. Get up and secure a better future for your children, grand children and great grand children.
The recent February strikes in Cameroon have shown that the more you misuse your economic power in distorting the voices of the people principally during elections, the more powerless you become because during moments like this, they are going to rise up and destroy your investment in an uncontrollable anger, putting the whole society in danger. Recently, it happened in Ivory Coast, and even Kenya, which before then was seen as a fortress of stability in Africa. The recent conflict proved the contrary, that it was cosmetic stability. Powerlessness of the majority of the people is far dangerous though some people always find a means of accusing others as perpetrators or as ethic problem. Sudan, Chad and some around the world are gradually falling into the same trouble caused by the powerlessness of the majority.
Bameka Village, Western Province, Cameroon, August 2008.
By Awafong Julius
Outreach Coordinator - Vote Sizing
Yaounde, October 2008.
About Awafong
9 years 21 weeks ago
4 days 13 hours ago
Awafong
EspañolLatest comments
-
I followed a report on TV this...
-
Here is Fon from Limbe who...
-
The poori already make up a...
-
I think it is very important that...
-
I've been a studenti of the...
-
...
Comments
There is no such thing as electing better leaders!
Thank you. There is no such thing as a better leader, we are all better or we are all not better. We are best when we come together, when we all participate in society.
You know the approach of trying to convince people to vote better and vote a better leader, to me is similar to the idea where, in the early days of democracy, only wise people were allowed to vote. This idea was challenged because a question was raised on how to know who is wise.
Again, today it is common to hear people praising others as moralists and humane in approach. What I usually tell people is that, what people do or say in public is different from what they do or say when they are alone. So it's a risk to allow an individual think he is morally fit and well positioned to decide for others.
In 1992, we had the first ever democratic elections in Cameroon, where so many people participated. During the day of declaration of results, the President of Supreme Court , before declaring the results said this "my hands are tied". And today when people decide note to vote anymore, they will blame them and others for not educating the electorates on the importance of voting. They think the non-voters are so stupid.
In 1992, we had fewer schools than we have today, we had fewer degree holders than we have today, and people still think that we have to educate people on the importance of voting.
When I think about this, I ask a question to myself, "does that mean that, in 1992, when we had fewer schools and fewer degree holders, people where on the contrary more learned than in 2008 when we have more schools and more degree holders"?
So if we don't deconstruct the believe that more money = more power and vice versa, which is what Vote Sizing is trying to deconstruct, then we will forever be taking society in a decline.
I like your analogy of using
I like your analogy of using the right tool (ie. car) for the right job (ie. journey). Can anyone really argue that one-person-one-vote is the right job to tackle all the corruption going on both in the political and economic spheres of our society? If not, then we have two choices: 1) to try and somehow elect better leaders - with our existing one vote - who will somehow change the system; or 2) get a better tool, like a weighted vote. Obviously, counting on the first solution is illogical, as the problem itself is still in the solution; and so the only way to make our votes count, is to make our votes count for more.
Post new comment