In every election we hear some trite phrases from our (candidate) politicians, such as "we have inherited a financial wreckage", "the country is in crisis" and most recently "we are returning to normality". The one phrase that stands out is that: this particular election is "the most crucial election battle". In European and parliamentary elections, less so in local ones, the parties are constantly repeating the phrase.
Of course, this is problematic. First of all, the phrase and what it represents has lost its meaning. For example, in a conversation of mine with an older gentleman, he jokingly said that "every election since we got rid of the junta has been the most crucial". Nowadaus, no one believes the phrase when they hear it, and therefore it does not energise people. On the contrary, since it has become such a common and trite phrase, it probably deters citizens from participating in elections because it reminds them of everything pretentious and fake about our political system.
The question is why our politicians continue to repeat it. The importance is strategic, because in saying that, it's a rallying cry for the party's base to be activated and go to vote. So it's stuck over the years. The other reason why perhaps that phrase continues to be used is because it drives some people away from the election. When a politician uses it, it might activate people's weariness of how sterile political discourse is. Those who will be most irritated by such a phrase are the people who do not support the party that expresses it. Thus, the ardent supporters of the party will be energized and the ardent opponents of the party may not even go out to vote. In this way, the phrase has a lukewarm positive effect since those who do not have a strong relationship with the party (positive and negative) will simply ignore it.
Let's be honest, however. Not all elections are of the same importance. After the fall of the junta, elections were critical to consolidating democracy and ensuring that there would not be another coup. Obviously these elections are not comparable to those that came after. On a similar level, any referendum is very, very crucial. Despite the fact that modern referendums have lost their power, they remain important.
The fact that one electoral battle is less crucial than another does not, of course, warrant a question of whether to participate in it. In an election it is unacceptable to abstain, for any reason whatsoever. Some elections do precede others in importance, but every election is critical. Through them, we choose our future as a society and political system. We must vote.
In conclusion, the next elections (regardles of when you are reading this article) are not the most crucial. But the notion of criticality is only meaningful in historical discussions and retrospectives. Every election is critical, so much so that it not only requires participation, but also thorough research for an informed vote. So let us ignore politicians saying that the next election is the most crucial. But let's all say that "the next election is critical" and honor it with an informed vote.
