The American Vote and Its Reaches

In the coming November elections I will not vote. Unlike other absentees, this will not be due to protest, lack of attractive alternatives, or (as is, regretfully, so common among Americans) apathy. I won't vote for the simple fact that I'm not an American citizen, and therefore have no voting rights. Why should this simple fact bother any of you? Maybe it should not. I think it should, however, because of another simple fact: just like many people around the world I will be significantly affected by the results of this election. Moreover, as a resident of the Middle East, my future prospects depend to a large extent on the American elections.
These two facts, my lack of voting rights and my position as one who will be gravely and personally affected by this election, manifest a peculiar problem that the contemporary theory of democracy has not yet resolved. Democracy, at least in its normative understanding (an understanding that, I fear, has escaped Stephen Schwartz), is the notion that an individual has the right to be involved in shaping the decisions and policies that influence his or her life. The common (almost natural) assumption is that our lives are most affected in the political unit of the state (or in American terms: the nation), and some sub-state units such as the city. Hence it seems obvious that voting rights belong to the citizens, not to foreigners: that the borders of suffrage lie at the borders of the state. What is more obvious than that?
But this question engenders another: is there anything less problematic than this assumption? Consider for a moment environmental policies or law-enforcement policies. In our increasingly globalizing world the outcomes of these policies cut across borders. Environmental hazards and unchecked crime organizations know no borders, and their affect on people beyond the borders of any given nation often go unchecked. The transnational affects of national policies are even more dramatic in the case of the U.S., the sole remaining super power (at least for the time being). When the U.S. economy falters, the economies of other countries feel it in waves not ripples. The results of a U.S national security policy are felt around the world.
This is the case especially with regard to current U.S. policies in the Middle East, which will affect my life as much--maybe even more--than it will affect your lives. Will you attack Iran? Will you give my country--Israel--the green light to attack Iran? How involved will you decide to be in resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict? Will you pull out from Iraq and Afghanistan, or will you stay longer? Will you forcefully attempt democratizing the Middle East, or will you suffice yourselves with some minimal regional stability? All those questions, and many more, lie at your doorstep in the coming November elections. As political theory gives no reliable answers to the disparity between the limits of suffrage and the limitless reach of election outcomes, we are left with the default: universal suffrage is the suffrage of a nation citizenry. (There are plenty who embrace cosmopolitan schemes, but cosmopolitanism contains its own unresolvable problems.) That means that I will not (and should not) be there in November to cast my vote. In the absence of any other reasonable solution we are left with one (far from perfect) answer, which is that your civic responsibility is heavier than some of you wish; it is not only your interests that you should take into account, but also my interests and the interests of all those Middle Easterners whose lives will be affected by this forthcoming collective decision. There is extra tonnage in the burden of American accountability.
To bear this burden appropriately American citizens should be more knowledgeable of the world and of available foreign policies. I believe Amitai Etzioni's Security First is a valuable contribution in the attempt to broaden and deepen American Citizens' understanding of world affairs. I hope this TPMCafe Book Club discussion on the merits and drawbacks of Etzioni's recommendations will also be of some help.
Good luck to all of us.















Well, I can't vote in Israel, even though the security of my country and my relatives has been held hostage for decades to the decisions of Israelis in their neighborhood, a neighborhood I have never even visited. I seem to recall that the United States approved a UN resolution back in 1967 rejecting the acquisition of territory by force, and asking Israelis to withdraw from territories occupied during "the recent conflict". The conflict isn't so recent anymore, and the world is still waiting.
I also dimly recall that some angry Arabs crashed some planes into two major America power centers and landmarks a few years ago.
It turns out I can't vote in Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Turkey, Germany or Italy either.
September 26, 2008 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not too bothered by your inability to vote here. As Dan K says, we can't vote in Israel. I also don't buy that I have any special obligations as an American citizen that citizens of other countries don't share as well.
Heck, I'm less concerned about your inability to vote here than I am about my own inability to vote for or against United Nations proposals.
September 26, 2008 4:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
As so often seems to happen, Dan's and Destor's comments overlook the real import of a post because...it's kinda sorta about Israel. Though this one isn't, really, but it is by an Israeli.
To wit: "That means that I will not (and should not) be there in November to cast my vote."
So Shalom is NOT saying he should have a vote in America.
"In the absence of any other reasonable solution we are left with one (far from perfect) answer, which is that your civic responsibility is heavier than some of you wish; it is not only your interests that you should take into account, but also my interests and the interests of all those Middle Easterners whose lives will be affected by this forthcoming collective decision. There is extra tonnage in the burden of American accountability."
Who could argue with this? While the progessive side here is consumed with Israel's "control" over US foreign policy--especially in the Middle East--can anyone really doubt that the U.S.'s OWN influence on the Middle East and the rest of the world is, oh, about 1000 times greater than Israel's?
Is Dan really going to argue that Israel "caused" 9/11 in any meaningful sense of the world? After all, OBL cited our bases in Saudi Arabia as the primary reason for his attacks. Until he saw the PR value in waving the bloody Palestinian shirt. I also seem to recall that Israel took a number of Scuds--and stayed out of the fight--when the U.S. decided to defend her ally, Kuwait, against Iraq.
"To bear this burden appropriately American citizens should be more knowledgeable of the world and of available foreign policies."
I guess for Destor, this is a particularly onerous obligation. The fact is, most foreigners know far more about the U.S. than Americans do about other countries. True, the obligation does fall equally--but who needs more remedial learning? I think that's Shalom's point.
September 26, 2008 8:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is Dan really going to argue that Israel "caused" 9/11 in any meaningful sense of the world? After all, OBL cited our bases in Saudi Arabia as the primary reason for his attacks.
I believe that our relationship with Israel is one of the two main issues - the other being oil - that are responsible for the overall very poor US relationship with the Arab world, and for the US now occupying the role of the "far enemy" in the eyes of some in the region. Israel and oil are the only reasons the US government feels compelled to maintain a military presence in the region, whether that presence is in Saudi Arabia, as it was at the beginning of the decade, or now Iraq.
If we solve those two problems and unwind ourselves from those two entanglements, we will no longer have any need to traipse around in other people's countries in the Middle East, among their holy sites, and we can leave entirely. Then their young hotheads will no longer fell the need to throw airplanes and truck bombs at us. They can then turn their attention to China or their own people.
September 27, 2008 1:08 AM | Reply | Permalink