If ever there were an argument needed for the development of a senior-secondary course called “Living in Canada,” it is bolstered further by the StatsCan report that more than one-quarter of the 7.5 million of Canada’s 24 million-plus eligible voters admitted that they did not cast a ballot in the 2011 federal election because they were “not interested.”
“Civics” has, in the past, been the title of a course about the responsibilities incurred by life in a democracy, but that sounds a bit lacklustre today. How about “Living in Canada?” That has a bit more of the up-to-date zing, more a touch of the joie de vivre of Canadian life — everything from the enigma of the appointed senate to Neil Young versus Big Oil.
An LiC course might reflect upon our quieter style of politics, our cultural values and those characteristics that, sometimes to the amusement of outsiders, define us as Canadian — that would be where Toronto Mayor Rob Ford is included.
Senior-secondary kids are aware of the daily headlines and how there are many countries where events like a change in government are normally preceded by street riots and the firing of live ammunition into the crowds seeking social and political change.
All we have to do is vote — yet nearly a third of us don’t bother, and the most common reason for not having voted, along with “not interested in voting,” was “my vote would not have made a difference in the election results.”
Among young people aged 18 to 24 who did not vote in 2011, the most common reason among those not interested in voting was, again according to StatsCan, “I don’t follow politics” as if politics is a sideshow and has nothing to do with mainstream life.
This electoral disillusionment is not simply the product of political flimflam. Analyses of the “non-vote” suggest it flourishes because mainstream politicians in this country generally fail to inspire hope in their communities or to relate to issues that dominate people’s daily lives, especially the lives of those just starting out.
Young folks might be losing interest in involving themselves with the democratic process for several other reasons.
As they near voting age, kids still tend to view issues through a fairly monochromatic lens. As Bob Dylan wrote:
“As easy it was to tell black from white
“It was all that easy to tell wrong from right.”
That’s not a bad summary of the binary yes/no-on/off way in which kids tend to see the world before further maturity teaches them that most issues are written in grey.
Worth discussing with youthful potential voters is that politics tends to involve a lot of backing and filling and prevarication on almost every issue. Most kids don’t trust or have confidence in evasiveness.
Politics seems to activate those finely tuned antennae, but senior-secondary kids in particular might, through classroom discussion of practices in other countries, learn that not voting because of distrust or lack of interest has the same result as not being allowed to vote at all.
That’s not the kind of future Canadian kids imagine or hope for, but kids do worry about what happens after school and seek some sense of reassurance about what the future will bring without fully understanding why it will require their participation if their hopes are to be realized.
Adolescents are idealists, and the reality of politics, sadly, is not big on idealism. Nonetheless, at the senior secondary level, 16- to 17-year-olds are certainly ready for class discussions about the kind of political conundrum whereby idealism might find itself in opposition to realism and a nation’s interests may sometimes clash with ethical and even moral considerations.
As confusing as that seems, it is still a strong argument for a senior-secondary course based on a better understanding of both Canada’s way of life and Winston Churchill’s dictum that “democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
Not forgetting that democracy produced Rob Ford.
Geoff Johnson is a retired superintendent of schools.
