ARE you ready to vote, I asked the audience in a talk organised by the Agora Society in Skudai, before parliament was dissolved.

Many raised their hands to say they were going to vote. Who they will vote for, is another question.

Of course, the candidates have yet to be announced. 

However, when asked who they did not want to vote for, the audience members were far more certain.

Some were worried about the voter turnout rate and if it would follow the trend of the state elections of Malacca, Sarawak and Johor.

While it is true that in the Johor elections, 43% more eligible voters were added to the electoral rolls as a consequence of automatic voter registration and a lower voting age, the turnout was low. Why was that?

A lower voter turnout rate could indicate that a significant number of out-of-state voters did not return to vote. This could have a disproportionate impact on some political parties.

In the Malacca and Johor elections, Pakatan Harapan politicians blamed the Election Commission for choosing an inconvenient polling date but failed to address the possibility that the voters felt disappointed and indifferent.

Academician Wong Chin Huat called the absentee voters Parti Aku Malas Undi, or I’m Too Lazy To Vote Party.

I strongly disagree with the negative label, because it pins moral blame on those who fail to vote as indolent.

Voting in Malaysia only a civic obligation, unlike in Singapore and Australia, where it is mandatory.

I encourage people to vote, whether it is a spoilt vote or a vote for the third force or an independent candidate. But I can also understand why some cannot or do not want to vote; it is not because they are “lazy”.

Out-of-state voters have to spend a considerable sum to return to their hometowns to vote. Other voters could have important matters to attend to.

Maybe the bigger question is, do the candidates, parties and the entire election campaign fail to inspire people to vote? The politicians have to do some soul searching and not to blame the voters.

The other narrative goes like this: because you are lazy, you let strangers make a decision on your behalf.

This shows the proponent’s consequentialism tendency; but what if you decide to spoil the vote or vote for third force? it is still the same as strangers making the decision of who is elected.

Isn’t election a time to listen to other people’s opinions and judgments for consideration?

Not voting could also be a mindful consideration and conscious decision; must one be lazy?

Of course, voters have free will. For example, some could rcast a protest vote, meaning, vote for the opponent of someone they detest, regardless of candidate’s quality and  trackrecord.

There are also parties asking Malaysians to do tactical voting. This involves asking voters to forgo all third force or independent candidates just to increase the chance of electing the second most likely candidate.

You must see the big picture, defeat the XX party, so the narrative goes.

Isn’t this mindset shaping the political culture of fielding “parachute” or “yes men” type of candidates? Is this acceptable?

Some voters look at the politicians on stage and turn away in disappointment and indifference, affecting their willingness to vote.

Tactical voting and “big picture” mindset could be the stumbling blocks to a high turnot for the general election.

Politicians have to give the people a good reason to vote for them. Attacking their opponents is not enough to persuade the voters. – October 17, 2022.

* Lim Chee Han is a founding member of Agora Society and a policy researcher. He holds a PhD in infection biology from Hannover Medical School, Germany, and an MSc in immunology and BSc in biotechnology from Imperial College London. Health and socioeconomic policies are his concerns. He believes a nation can advance significantly if policymaking and research are taken seriously.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.