Tête à Tête: Are online policy quizzes beneficial to the electorate?

[one_third]Eloise Millard say YES

[dropcap]F[/dropcap]rom the outset, reducing a matter as pivotal as the upcoming general election to something a basic as an online quiz seems to undermine its importance. However, we need to bear in mind that in the last general election, around 39 per cent of the electorate did not vote. That absent 39 per cent had the power to swing the vote. If they had voted, we may not have had a hung parliament. The leadership of this country could be entirely different.

For many people, party politics are an impenetrable and daunting concept. Our party leaders use emotive language and empty promises to encourage the public to vote for them whilst also attacking the policies of the opposition.

Is it any wonder considering the amount of political jargon and contradictory claims being thrown around that people feel alienated from their policy makers?

Allowing the general public to be able to read the policies proposed by the five main parties without the distraction of stigma attached to certain parties or the impact of political propaganda is a good thing. Education on party politics and voting is not part of our national curriculum. Beside what is conveyed through the media, people have no knowledge of how our country is run. These quizzes open the door for people who might feel other disengaged and disillusioned with politics.

Of course, there is the argument that not everyone who didn’t vote will be very active on the internet, or even have access to a computer. In wake of the 2005 general election, it was revealed that only 37 per cent of 18 to 24 year olds voted. It goes without saying that young people are the most active users of the internet. Arguably, the young electorate are also more likely to vote for leftist-liberal parties. I’m sure like me, many of us fear that UKIP will have more political weight after the upcoming election. If more young people vote, there is less of a chance of UKIP gaining more seats in parliament.

If these online quizzes simplify party politics and encourage young people to vote, then what’s the harm?

The harm is that these quizzes may not be accurate. However, I decided to take them myself. I took both the 38degrees quiz and the much more thorough ‘vote for policies’ and I was content with both the outcomes. I would give BuzzFeed or the like’s attempts a miss. I am actively interested in politics and have thought carefully about how I will cast my vote and the results of both quizzes were the party that I planned to vote for. We are a long way from ensuring that the entire electorate feel included in and have a balanced view of party politics, but as far as I’m concerned this is one foot on the ladder to positive change.[/one_third]

[one_third_last]Will Tucker says NO

[dropcap]V[/dropcap]oting is not like going shopping. In an increasingly consumerist world, it seems that everything is now boiled down to a choice we all make as consumers. Websites like Vote for Policies and VoteMatch promote an idea of voting as just another consumerist choice. Here’s why that’s a bad idea.

Liberal capitalist society relies on the idea that we are all neutral individuals, making choices in a vacuum. This is, frankly, nonsense. We do not make political choices in isolation – we constantly have social factors, like class, race, gender and religion, acting upon us. They define who we are and what our interests are.

To this end, the idea that if only we could pick just between policies, some great truth about what the public really want would be revealed is hugely misguided. There’s also a major sampling error in suggesting that the most popular party by these polls is ‘what the public want’.

The sort of person that fills in an online survey is disproportionately likely to be young, mobile and educated, quite unlike many people in this country.

Also, this view of just picking policies off the shelf, and therefore parties, completely misunderstands how political parties work, and how policies are developed. The big political parties are mass-member organisations, with a huge variation of views in their parliamentary party alone, not to mention their wider membership. Many policies will be the subject of ongoing discussion and debate within a party. Parties are more than what their leaders say – many will have more or less radical candidates, and simply shopping for a leadership line that you like the sound of, with no reference even to what the local candidate might think, is seriously mistaken, and websites like this encourage this sort of behaviour.

Looking at a party’s policies without thinking about what sort of people are in the party, how they are funded and what their motivations are is a recipe for trouble.

You might not find it that important, for example, if a party is funded by trade unions or by a few wealthy individuals, but this might make all the difference in how working people’s interests are represented. Think, too, of the identity of the people in each party: is it representative of a cross-section of society, or is it predominantly middle-class? This could make all the difference in how it really uses your vote.

Basically, to ignore the social factors that underpin all our decisions, and the realities of how modern political parties work, is a bad idea and makes people less politically informed, rather than more. So don’t just go shopping for policies – think about the candidates, the people, and who really represents your interests.[/one_third_last]