I don’t know any better than that just about everybody in my hometown voted for the CDA. Not that we spoke about politics much in my family, but if the subject ever did come up, it was always the party that so many Catholics in Limburg have supported for decades. I can’t actually remember whether I voted for the Christian Democrat party leader that first time, as an eighteen-year-old election debutante. Probably, ‘because everybody else does’. Besides, what did I know about social issues such as healthcare, education and poverty, or what the parties thought about them?
Strangely enough, we don’t really talk about the party manifestos much at the office. We’re too busy writing (about things like polarisation and extremism), dealing with printing problems, student freelancers, editing. And yet, it hasn’t escaped anybody’s notice what happens on television, on social media, or in the newspapers, who said something controversial this time, or who is angry at whom.
On Tuesday morning, colleague Cleo Freriks said: “Have you read how many political parties have a manifesto that conflicts with the rule of law? Twelve!” Few editors will have missed the report from an independent commission for the Dutch Bar Association – for some, this anti-constitutional aspect may be the final straw when it comes to casting their vote on Wednesday, 29 October. Other issues colleagues consider important (I did a quick survey): a party that is pro-Europe – “Volt! But they’re so small that I worry I’m wasting my vote” –, that is really interested in combating climate change, and offers a solid safety net for people who are less well-off or struggling. Another prefers a party who doesn’t want more cuts to primary or higher education (“please don’t stuff 33 kids into one classroom!”). “Mostly, I just want a stable cabinet,” says the person in the next office along.
“And what is on the editor in chief’s mind?” his roommate wants to know. “Healthcare, the fact that some politicians want to limit basic health insurance so that no new medicines or better treatments will be covered.” This week, several patient and client organisations sounded the alarm about these proposed austerity plans. Three years ago, I probably wouldn’t have thought about it, but when someone in your family is dependent on expensive medicine, your point of view changes. Next week, I won’t be voting strategically, and certainly not out of habit, because everybody ‘in the village’ does it. This time, I will be voting with my heart.
The editor-in-chief gives a look behind the scenes at the editorial office.