Skip to main content

What Russell Brand got wrong about voting

By Eric Liu, Special to CNN
November 5, 2013 -- Updated 1231 GMT (2031 HKT)
A possible future voter peeks out of the booth while his mother casts a ballot in a 2012 election in Metamora, Illinois.
A possible future voter peeks out of the booth while his mother casts a ballot in a 2012 election in Metamora, Illinois.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Eric Liu: Between 60% and 80% of eligible voters won't vote in Tuesday's elections
  • Liu: Russell Brand says it's a folly to vote, politics are rigged; we need a revolution
  • Liu says in a democracy, not voting amounts to voting for all you detest and oppose
  • Liu: If all young, poor, black, Latino, Asian voters cast ballots, that would cause a revolution

Editor's note: Eric Liu is the founder of Citizen University and author of several books, including "The Gardens of Democracy" and "The Accidental Asian." He served as a White House speechwriter and policy adviser for President Bill Clinton. Follow him on Twitter @ericpliu

(CNN) -- It's Election Day in America. Across the country, mayors, governors and other officials will be elected. The results will be dissected for meaning. Mandates will be claimed and trends extrapolated. And we'll all pretend not to notice that somewhere between 60% and 80% of eligible voters didn't bother to cast a ballot.

It's an off-year election, yes, with no compelling national contests. But even in years that we think of as high-water marks of civic participation, such as 2008, four out of 10 eligible voters stay home. In the world's self-proclaimed greatest democracy, a norm is now setting in that says, quite simply, voting is for suckers.

Eric Liu
Eric Liu

That certainly was the message of a recent interview and essay by the comedian Russell Brand. Both went viral, especially among young people, and it's easy to see why. He's an irreverent, facile commentator. And his message, meant for a British audience but applicable here too, is that politics is now fundamentally rigged, making voting a folly and revolution a necessity.

But what Brand really ends up proving, in entertaining fashion, is that being half-right can be a very dangerous thing.

It's hard to dispute that politics in America has become a rigged game. Why else is Congress is in a mad rush to cut food stamps while shielding corporate subsidies? How else would more than half the $400 billion in annual federal tax breaks flow to the richest 5% of Americans? We live in an age when advantage and disadvantage are increasingly undeserved, when economic inequality and unequal political voice reinforce each other in a vicious cycle.

This is what the scholars Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson described in their book "Winner-Take-All Politics" -- a methodical, bipartisan array of national policies to disinvest in the middle class and the poor and to reward the privileged for already being privileged. And this is what gave us both the tea party and Occupy Wall Street, movements united by little except their deep-seated anti-elite anger.

Rep. John Lewis: Ruling is a 'dagger'
Voices from the voting war
High court halts key civil rights law

It's understandable, then, why millions of younger, poorer, darker-skinned Americans -- for that's who disproportionately fills the ranks of the non-voters -- would check out of politics and voting altogether. But the stark contrast between what the tea party and Occupy each did after their first bursts of anger underscores precisely why checking out makes a bad situation worse.

The tea party organized at the precinct level, fielded candidates, won elections and became if not a majority then a king-making (or at least government-shutting) minority in legislatures across the land, including the U.S. House of Representatives. The Occupy movement didn't. That helps explain why American politics still tilts more rightward on economic issues than its people do, and why a president re-elected by a wide margin a year ago is still playing defense.

Critics such as Brand may be astute in their diagnosis, but they're deluded in their prescription. There is no such thing as not voting. In a democracy, not voting is voting -- for all that you detest and oppose.

While abstaining from the ballot can be dressed up as an act of passive resistance, it is in fact an active delivery of power and voice to those who'd like to take advantage of you. Far from weakening an unjust system, not voting only amplifies the system's pain-inflicting power.

So perhaps the most compelling appeal to today's nonvoters isn't that "it's our patriotic duty" (though it is) or that "others gave their lives for this right" (though they did). It's this: not voting is for suckers.

Some frustrated nonvoters claim there's no meaningful choice anyway between the two parties. This is colossally naive.

Imagine for a moment where the country would be today if all the people who formed the tea party had decided that politics was just too sordid or that their individual votes couldn't possibly make a difference. Politics may indeed be sordid, but it changes only to the extent we aggregate votes.

To be sure, today's political debate is too narrow, disallowing ideas such as a guaranteed minimum income or single-payer health care. But it also, at least for now, disallows a dismantling of Social Security or repeal of civil rights laws. The question is this: Which set of disallowed ideas would you hate to see become law? And what's more likely to usher in what you fear -- voting or not voting?

Brand and his fans speak vaguely of the need for a "revolution" to upend everyday democracy. It turns out everyday democracy already provides for revolution. In the 2012 election, youth voters, low-income voters, Latino voters and Asian voters all turned out at less than 50%. Mobilize 100% of them and our nation's political priorities become completely different and our government radically more responsive to all the people.

You say you want a revolution? Vote for one.

Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.

Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Eric Liu.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
November 21, 2014 -- Updated 1925 GMT (0325 HKT)
Maria Cardona says Republicans should appreciate President Obama's executive action on immigration.
November 21, 2014 -- Updated 1244 GMT (2044 HKT)
Van Jones says the Hunger Games is a more sweeping critique of wealth inequality than Elizabeth Warren's speech.
November 20, 2014 -- Updated 2329 GMT (0729 HKT)
obama immigration
David Gergen: It's deeply troubling to grant legal safe haven to unauthorized immigrants by executive order.
November 21, 2014 -- Updated 0134 GMT (0934 HKT)
Charles Kaiser recalls a four-hour lunch that offered insight into the famed director's genius.
November 20, 2014 -- Updated 2012 GMT (0412 HKT)
The plan by President Obama to provide legal status to millions of undocumented adults living in the U.S. leaves Republicans in a political quandary.
November 21, 2014 -- Updated 0313 GMT (1113 HKT)
Despite criticism from those on the right, Obama's expected immigration plans won't make much difference to deportation numbers, says Ruben Navarette.
November 21, 2014 -- Updated 0121 GMT (0921 HKT)
As new information and accusers against Bill Cosby are brought to light, we are reminded of an unshakable feature of American life: rape culture.
November 20, 2014 -- Updated 2256 GMT (0656 HKT)
When black people protest against police violence in Ferguson, Missouri, they're thought of as a "mob."
November 19, 2014 -- Updated 2011 GMT (0411 HKT)
Lost in much of the coverage of ISIS brutality is how successful the group has been at attracting other groups, says Peter Bergen.
November 19, 2014 -- Updated 1345 GMT (2145 HKT)
Do recent developments mean that full legalization of pot is inevitable? Not necessarily, but one would hope so, says Jeffrey Miron.
November 19, 2014 -- Updated 1319 GMT (2119 HKT)
We don't know what Bill Cosby did or did not do, but these allegations should not be easily dismissed, says Leslie Morgan Steiner.
November 19, 2014 -- Updated 1519 GMT (2319 HKT)
Does Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas have the influence to bring stability to Jerusalem?
November 19, 2014 -- Updated 1759 GMT (0159 HKT)
Even though there are far fewer people being stopped, does continued use of "broken windows" strategy mean minorities are still the target of undue police enforcement?
November 18, 2014 -- Updated 0258 GMT (1058 HKT)
The truth is, we ran away from the best progressive persuasion voice in our times because the ghost of our country's original sin still haunts us, writes Cornell Belcher.
November 18, 2014 -- Updated 2141 GMT (0541 HKT)
Children living in the Syrian city of Aleppo watch the sky. Not for signs of winter's approach, although the cold winds are already blowing, but for barrel bombs.
November 17, 2014 -- Updated 1321 GMT (2121 HKT)
We're stuck in a kind of Middle East Bermuda Triangle where messy outcomes are more likely than neat solutions, says Aaron David Miller.
November 17, 2014 -- Updated 1216 GMT (2016 HKT)
In the midst of the fight against Islamist rebels seeking to turn the clock back, a Kurdish region in Syria has approved a law ordering equality for women. Take that, ISIS!
November 17, 2014 -- Updated 0407 GMT (1207 HKT)
Ruben Navarrette says President Obama would be justified in acting on his own to limit deportations
ADVERTISEMENT