Anyway, I'm 39 pages into the copy I picked up in the January Sales a few days ago (apparently this is an extended edition, so your copy may vary), and found this fantastic exchange that so perfectly sums up my feelings, that I simply had to share it with the internet. Jill is a nurse in the hospital that is treating the recently-repatriated "Man From Mars", and Ben is a newshound trying to grill her for details, and simultaneously filling her in on the significance of the Stranger:
Ben: As you know, his [the Secretary General's] administration is shaky.It's not that I wish to imply that politics is unimportant - on the contrary, it is VITALLY important that there is a strong, responsible, representative, and moral assembly heading up the country, and organising those things that would not otherwise be accomplished (or be done less efficiently) through private enterprise or competition. Any system of government that involves more than two parties competing for votes will necessarily cause, as an emergent property of the system, political maneuvering. These conflicts are, themselves, highly important, as it is through their success or failure that the ruling party maintains or loses its power, and thus that the edicts are issued which affect all our lives. They are fundamentally important.
Jill: I don't pay any attention to politics.Ben: You should. It's only barely less important than your own heartbeat.
Jill: I don't pay any attention to that, either.
It's just that they're not interesting. This is a matter of subjectivity, of course - there are some people who gain a huge amount of satisfaction from the intricacies of celebrity gossip, and in the same way that I can understand that pleasure without sharing it, I can see that the ins-and-outs of Westminster or Washington could be just as fascinating.
But more than that, it's not, to my mind, productive. It is, of course, crucially important in theory that, in a democracy, citizens are able to engage with and influence the course of the politics that affects them, and that they remain aware of and well-informed on the issues of the day. But (and I say this fully aware of my position as one who is hugely apathetic towards the political process) it seems to me that any private citizen, or even a group of them, cannot make any noticable impact on the minds of policy makers, without significant financial backing - it seems that politics is conducted only by politicians, and political groups. The Fox-Hunting ban, the War in Iraq, the University Fees hike - all of these appeared to be loudly opposed by the public, and yet were still condoned by the government.
It would be horrifyingly naive of me to confuse being vocal with being in the majority, or to refuse to acknowledge that the smooth and efficient running of politics necessitates certain compromises of values. Nevertheless, the impression that I've gained is that it's impossible to make any impact on decision-making without extensive connections, and considerable expense of time and effort, and so I can't see why people would stir themselves to do so on matters that don't directly influence them. Make no mistake, I'm inordinately grateful that such worthy causes as women's rights and the abolition of slavery have been supported by worthy, selfless, champions - but I can't understand their motivation. Perhaps I'm a selfish person, but to expend such extraordinary effort, in the face of such frustrating opposition, on behalf of another's cause, takes altruism of which I can only dream.
In short, politics (in a developed, democratic, country, such as the one in which I am privileged to live) is very much like my heartbeat. It functions, better or worse, and it does so despite my lack of attention - in fact, it would be nearly unaffected by any effort of mine to affect it. I am very glad of what it does, but I see no gains to be made in examining it too closely.
