Isaac Asimov’s “Franchise”: Merging Philosophy and Politics
With democracies facing growing threats at the global scale, Election Day has become a vital platform for individuals to directly address the flaws in our democracy––be it worsening bipartisanship, politicization of the Supreme Court, or unethical aspects of elections such as gerrymandering that encourage reform on the administration of elections. Isaac Asimov’s “Franchise” introduces a system distinct from conventional democratic procedure in which no one goes to the polls and votes for the next president except for the “Voter of the Year”––a randomly selected individual answers a series of questions and single-handedly determines the results of an election. In the dystopian short story, the supercomputer Multivac gathers Norman Muller’s opinions on timely issues and completes a single representative experiment. Asimov’s dystopian short story poses fundamental problems in maintaining an actual democracy. For instance, what if the selected person votes out of self-interest without considering the options that would be best for the common good? Or, what if the “Voter of the Year” has little interest in current events and shows minimal political engagement? Should chosen voters have the option to abstain from voting and opt-out? By evaluating the importance of informed voters and the validity of compulsory voting, Asimov effectively utilizes literature as a means to distinguish between the right to vote and the rightness of voting and contribute to the existing philosophical discourse on individualism and collectivism.
Collectivism, at its core, describes the practice of prioritizing goals of the body politic, thus promoting group cohesion, over individual pursuits. On the other hand, the individualist position values a citizen’s rights and entitlements. Asimov incorporates an interdisciplinary approach in “Franchise” by integrating politics into philosophy as he associates collectivism with the rightness of voting and individualism with the right to vote. The individualist view in such a context is straightforward: regardless of whether or not one is equipped with the necessary knowledge to vote, one can vote as he or she has the right to vote. Nonetheless, collectivists would argue that uninformed voting does not positively contribute to the common good. Some collectivists even encourage the government to grant votes or additional votes (i.e. plural voting) to citizens who display a respectable level of knowledge.
An individual who doesn’t seem to reflect said knowledge is Norman Muller of Bloomington, Indiana: the chosen “Voter of the Year” for the 2008 Presidential election. Though Norman’s wife views his selection as a privilege and celebrates in excitement, Norman immediately “[buries] his face in his hands and [sits] motionless” upon hearing the news. Though Norman ultimately accepts the dubious honor of representing the entire electorate, Norman understands that he is not capable of making the appropriate decisions and providing substantive answers during his interview with Multivac. In fact, when asked about his opinions on the price of eggs, Norman simply replies: “I don’t know the price of eggs.” Moreover, rather than focusing on the Multivac’s questions and carefully weighing the potential consequences of his responses, Norman completes the interview as quickly as he can as he wants to return to normalcy. Such actions reflect the behavior of an uninformed voter who fails to recognize the value of exercising the franchise. In this regard, Asimov places greater significance on the rightness of voting and challenges Norman’s individualist mindset as he exhibits minimal efforts to actively engage in civic discourse and votes without basic knowledge of the country’s political, social, and economic conditions.
On the note of informed voting, Asimov discusses the validity of compulsory voting and the necessity of providing citizens with the right to abstain from casting a ballot. As Norman does not trust himself to make an informed decision about the future president, he initially asks the secret service agent to pick another citizen. Yet, the agent notes that “Multivac picked [Norman] as the most representative this year” and forces Norman to partake in the election process. The single representative voting system promotes compulsion and decreases the chances of informed voting. To a large extent, the notion of compulsory voting contradicts the fundamental values of a democratic society as such restraints prevent elections from capturing an accurate representation of our society. While compulsory voting offers benefits such as increased voter turnout and discouragement of voter suppression, Asimov highlights Norman’s unwillingness to serve as the “Voter of the Year” to criticize the legitimacy of the individualist argument of compulsory voting and underline the impact of attracting informed voters by applying collectivist ideals.
The debate around individualism and collectivism surfaces in almost every facet of our lives. Yet, Asimov’s “Franchise” reframes the parameters of the age-old discussion and introduces the philosophical principles in the realm of philosophy and politics. Though Asimov’s literary works are often recognized for their innovative science-fictional ideas and unprecedented narratives, “Franchise” deserves recognition for shedding light on timely topics such as informed voting and compulsory voting that promote philosophical discourse and encourage readers to reflect on the current state of United States democracy.
Here's a link to an online PDF of Isaac Asimov’s “Franchise”:
Comentários