AT the end of the day, voting in any election is a personal decision.

This decision can be influenced by many factors. Loyalty to a political party looms very high on the list. In Jamaica’s tribal political culture, the main political parties can always depend on their diehard adherents for support. Come rain or sunshine, they will brave the elements to lend their support to their tribe. Many of them in this political tribal amphictyony would have benefited from the scraps that the party hands down to them from time to time, especially when elections roll around and handouts are aplenty.

Then there are those who decide to withdraw from the political process. They are sometimes called the “undecideds”, but this is not necessarily a true description of who they are. They have certainly made a decision not to participate and, for many, this position has been entrenched for a number of years.

This group is not beholden to any political party. And it does not mean they will not come down from the fence occasionally to vote, but, by and large, they have become disaffected with how the politics is conducted. Some hold the strong position that given our broken Westminster system of governance, any vote for either party is a wasted vote. They would rather stay home than dirty their fingers in any political ink.

There are those who stay home simply because they have come to the conclusion that they do not see how their lives can be bettered if they do go out and vote. They are not necessarily apathetic, but are in revolt against a system that they believe has not delivered for them.

Then there are those who, in my estimation, are few in number, who refuse to vote because of their belief that serious and radical constitutional changes to how we govern ourselves ought to become a reality. To vote in any election is to support the continuance of a system that has not served the country well and is in urgent need of revamping. They will not indulge the hypocrisy of voting in a system with which they have a visceral and intellectual disagreement. Withholding their votes is not just a sign of protest, but a demonstration of a philosophical position to which they are deeply committed.

I find sympathy with this group, with a caveat. While I detest the present system, I take the practical approach that the mechanism of government, though not the best, is what we have. Not voting in an election will only allow oneself to be governed by the choice of a few and dwindling lumpen elements on either side of the political divide. I am conscious that presently the mechanism of government calls for 63 parliamentarians to be elected to Parliament, with senators to be appointed later and a prime minister installed. None of this will change anytime soon.

While we must agitate vigorously for constitutional change, the business of government has to go on. I, therefore, take what I believe to be the pragmatic course of assessing the history of the performance of each tribe while in office. As elections draw near, I am paying keen attention to their policy pronouncements and their posturing on the political stage to determine which side is best able to lead the country at this time. In a later piece, after the election date has been announced, I will give a fuller appraisal of which side I have decided should lead at this time.

However much I despise the present system and want to see radical constitutional change, I cannot abide the idea that I can sit idly by while a tribal group determines my future. As it is now, and as trends suggest, the tribal arrangement on either side will prevail. Over the past three general elections, we have seen a steady decline of people going to the polls. The last election in 2020 saw over 703,000 electors voting out of 1,913, 410 who were registered to do so. The JLP finally won with 49 seats, and the PNP 14. This represented a 37 per cent turnout, falling from 48.37 per cent in the 2016 election.

This is not a state of affairs to be happy with, but despite the odds I will go out and vote for the side I believe will do a better job at running the country. I want to have some stake in the game, to be a strong participant in the process, to have a seat at the table rather than being part of the menu. If I do not vote, I will be governed by the choices of those who do. In the end, my vote might not change anything in my favour, but I am not going down without a fight. And that would have been my personal decision.

Dr Raulston Nembhard is a priest, social commentator, and author of the books Finding Peace in the Midst of Life’s Storms; Your Self-esteem Guide to a Better Life, and Beyond Petulance: Republican Politics and the Future of America. He also hosts a podcast — Mango Tree Dialogues — on his YouTube channel. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or stead6655@aol.com.

Raulston Nembhard