Microblogging, Constituency Service and Impression Management by Nigel Jackson and Darren Lilleker. Is Western Democracy Broken?

Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.

- Franklin D. Roosevelt

As a child I grew up in a southern and more rural region of the country. As was to be expected, the political alignments of my family members were predominantly conservative. Growing up there, however, their views never really affected my view of the world, since I simply did not care about politics. Albeit my parents' distrust of immigrants and aversion to homosexuals (whom they never actively opposed, luckily). I never had any problems with befriending people of varying nationalities and sexual orientations. I remained absent from the world of politics until my late teen years.

What drove me to finally develop an interest, was the way in which my parents voted. Every election period they could be counted on to vote for a conservative candidate. One who most often expressed a resentment for big government, open borders and untraditional relationships. When I asked my father why he voted like he did, the response was always something along the lines of 'He looks like a reliable guy' or 'She said some things in a debate that I agree with'. This seemed rather strange at the time. Wasn't the whole point of a democracy that you vote for those who represent your opinion and ideas?

Geert Wilders. Vote if you think muslims are kind of scary.

During my college years I learned that the vast majority of people I know vote in the exact same way. They often vote based on their perception of a politician as a person, or on a rather select set of quotes that barely had any bearing to the actual political standpoints of their chosen representative. Many people might be familiar with Geert Wilders, a man who is considered by most to be a hard right conservative with a very particular hatred for Islam and Muslims. In the 2010 dutch elections, Wilders came in third for a place in government that year. The dutch politcal landscape was divided into two camps from this point forward. Much like the American political landscape, people now, more than ever, felt as if they were divided in two camps. The republicans in favor of Wilders and the democrats in opposition.

Again, this seemed so utterly confusing. I had personally read about the political standings of Wilders at the time, and what he stood for was not exclusively conservative. Not at all even. He was very much a proponent of an even more socialised healthcare system, more benefits for the lowest income groups (albeit more so for natives than immigrants) and higher wages for lower tier public servants like teachers, policemen and health care workers. Why then, did everyone recognize him solely for his obviously racist standings when it came to immigration and integration? The point I'm trying to make is: this was a result of his impression management. People either refused to acknowledge, or simply didn't bother with learning, anything about the actual political standpoints of Wilders.

Emile Roemer. Vote for his pretty smile.

And this has, for a long time, been the case with many politicians. Very few people actually take the time to educate themselves before heading to the voting booth. In the last dutch elections a man named Emile Roemer came in second. Some of the most quoted reason for his success were his 'jovial face' and 'appearance of a relatable family man'. These factors have absolutely nothing to do with the political standings of Roemer, nothing to do with his capability of performing his task as an elected official and nothing to do with the profile of his party. This kind of voting behaviour is directly opposed to the purpose of a democracy, wherein constituents should vote for someone who will represent their ideologies, and politicians work to meet the needs of their constituents. Not a world in which politicians jump at any chance to stand under a spotlight and disclose information about their personal lives to gain sympathy votes.

Lilleker and Jackson show how politicians in the UK are slowly starting to adopt twitter as a new communication method. I hope to see them use it to prove their capability, convey their political standings and communicate with their constituents. However, this might just turn into another way to show off family photo's and make some hollow jokes. Take for instance the American system, where the vast majority of news sources are too preoccupied with showing pictures of Obama smoking weed in college, or stories about Mitt Romney once strapping a dog to his car, to actually care about their political standpoints. Ladies and Gentlemen I do fear, that our democracies are broken.

Nigel Farage (UK). Vote for what he believes in.