Voting Dilemma

By: RMC RSW

The right of suffrage is enshrined in the 1987 Constitution, it is the

embodiment of the word democracy, which means that the power to elect
public officials reside within the ambit of the citizens.
It is one of the civic duty of citizens, which is to elect and vote for persons
who in their right mind are the best to represent them. Public officials are
main task is to represent the citizens within their respective domain, they
are tasked to hear and provide feasible solutions to the plights of the
citizens. Thus, the primary basis of voting a person, is to see whether such
person would be able to perform his or her official functions.
The dilemma I am referring to is who to vote? Should we vote based on
their capacity to perform their official functions effectively? Or should we
vote based on their capability to help your family?
Let’s say for example, that the former is very efficient as to performing his
or her public functions, nevertheless, he or she despite your continued
support through out his or her entire election bids, still declines your
existence, and does not even support your family. While, the latter, is not
efficient as to doing his or her mandated official functions, whom you
denied support for many decades, appreciates your existence and is willing
to help your family. However, both of them are corrupt, as it is already
ubiquitous in our society.

How can we vote? Let’s go back to the ration d’etre of right to suffrage,
Voting is a responsibility of citizens. The law does not require citizens to
vote, but voting is a very important part of any democracy. By voting,
citizens are participating in the democratic process. Citizens vote for
leaders to represent them and their ideas, and the leaders support the
citizens' interests.
According the purpose above, we vote leaders that represent us and our
ideas, and the same is also supported by the leader.
The moral dilemma here is that, we want to vote for the first persons, who
are efficient as to performing their official functions, nevertheless, due to
their denial of our existence and their neglection of our plight rendered us
quizzical. The first ones are blind as to our efforts, whilst, the second ones
who are not efficient, sees are efforts and are willing to help our families,
albeit, they have failed their official functions.
Now, going back to the question, whom should we vote? The former that is
the best for the general populace, but continually disrespects you, or the
latter who is not efficient, but, sees your efforts and value.

As defined in the fifth paragraph, citizens vote for leaders who represent
them and their ideas, and the leaders support the citizen’s interests.
It was never mentioned that you need to for the best of the general
populace, rather, you must vote for leaders that represent your ideas.

However, the second candidate, is not representing your ideals, he or she

is only willing to help you to alleviate your family. And, the first candidate, is
indifferent to your plight as he or she does not even recognize your
existence and efforts.

The best method to surpass this dilemma is by not voting either of them.
But I am a realist, my interest is for the betterment of my family, and not for
the betterment of my countrymen. Each of us, has our own interest, each of
us will always choose what is better for our family, and not otherwise. Even
politicians run for their interest and not for the interest of its citizens,
although I am generalizing, there are of course, certain exceptions, for
there are politicians who are genuine to promote good governance.
Nonetheless, none of the choices above are genuine, they are also
gunning to be a public official for they are corrupt, they want to milk the
coffers of our government.
In conclusion, we should elect someone who will aid us and strive to
alleviate our problem, though selfish at it may seem, but we are living in a
world, where our interest takes primacy over the interest of others.