goodbye apathy

I found chapter nine interesting because of the concept of apathy or indifference in regards to political participation. Dagger list some reasons why apathy should not be 'fixed'. For example "(apathy) may simply indicate that the members of the electorate are content with the situation in which they find their polity and themselves" (pg 133). This in particular resonated with me considering the record turnout this last election and all the problems that fueled this past election. The second argument basically states that as long as enough people vote then every thing works out, except for defining what "enough" is. The last argument I find most convincing, that being, that "relatively high levels of indifference among an electorate are desirable and perhaps even necessary to ensure the health of a democracy" (pg 134).

Being that apathy IS a problem for Dagger, he considers ways to combat apathy. One example he gives is Instant Direct Democracy. Instant Direct Democracy in a nut shell (from my understanding) is basically where each citizen votes on pretty much everything from the comfort of their home. At first glance this seems like a nice idea. In this concept of government there is less under/over representation as well as less influence by interest groups. However, there are some disadvantages as well. Disadvantages like the fact that most people are in one way or another incorrectly informed about political issues. This model runs the threat of requiring too much of the average joe, at least in a political sense some would argue.

Dismissing Instand Direct Democracy Dagger shifts focus on another possible means of combatting apathy. He suggest making voting mandatory, making voting registration automatic, or making voting registration a requirement. Ultimately, I find that the last option is the best, or the best of the three at least. Here we create political awareness to a small degree and still preserve the ability to vote or not to vote.

Ultimately, I'm struggeling to place apathy in the category of disease (my words, not Daggers). Perhaps that is the liberal side of me overpowering the republican side. Just like the third appeal to apathy, I feel that apathy is a part of democracy. Democracy is a government forged by the people and their expressing their opinion. Why does apathy get such a bad rap? As Sarte said "If you don't choose, you have chosen not to choose." I'm trying to understand perhaps that Dagger does not say apathy is bad, only that it is not a productive element of republican liberalism. Thoughts anyone...or perhaps not?