Though many of Luo Lei’s and Cheng Cheng’s actions throughout the class monitor elections process were definitely not ethically sound, it was in no doubt a strong example of democracy. The documentary Please Vote for Me challenges many of our notions about democracy, especially as the best mode of governance. Even though many aspects of the democratic system is flawed, is it still a preferable alternative to a dictatorship? Most likely. Despite the high degree of involvement from all of the candidates’ parents and the boys’ collective use of their classmates to ridicule the other candidates and dissuade them from participating in the election, the democratic process has undoubtedly taught them all (especially Luo Lei as the winer) the importance of appealing to their base and maintaining a good rapport with their constituents. Being that another election will be held a year later, Luo Lei’s victory does not provide him with a blank check to do as he pleases with the reins of power. His next year as class monitor cannot possibly be the same as his last two, because the newly-instituted democratic process will serve as a check upon his familiar authoritarian tendencies. While many of the candidates’ actions may fall under the Machiavellian principle of using any means necessary to preserve the security of the state, the democratic process provides stringent parameters for the candidates’ actions and will do so in Luo Lei’s next term as class monitor. While democracy has not turned the kids into perfect people, it will definitely change them for the better.
Introduction to Comparative Politics: Nationalism, Ideology, and State Power
Professor Shervin Malekzadeh
I agree that the class monitor election was not ethical, but the process was still democratic. I also think it is interesting to bring up Luo Lei’s reelection. Presumablely, he will appeal to the electorate (the rest of the class) by not beating his classmates. Right before the election in the film, Luo Lei already starts to change his behavior; his classmates say he beats them less. However, the film also highlights the short-term view of many of the students. The students overwhelmingly vote for Luo Lei because he gives them gifts right before the election. Although I hope that the electorate of most modern countries has a better ability to delay gratification than seven-year-olds, the event does suggest an interesting parallel. Often voters in U.S. elections vote for candidates who promise them the most and the most recently rather than voting in their own best long-term interest.