I know very little about current events. I am particularly ignorant about political affairs. At times I scan the on-line version of the New York Times or the BBC , looking for something to write about and I come up empty - not because there’s nothing there, but because I don’t understand hardly anything I read.
I don’t think I’m alone in my ignorance. While there are many people who follow the news closer than I do, much of the news is presented in such simplistic ways that it doesn’t inspire much thought. Instead, it evokes a one-sided opinion that is easily changed with the mood of the nation.
Take the Iraqi War, for instance. In a New York Times article some time ago, Gary Bass writes -
Of all the people who deserve some blame for the debacle in Iraq, don’t forget the American public. Today, about two-thirds of Americans oppose the war. But back in March 2003, when United States troops stormed into Iraq, nearly three out of four Americans supported the invasion. Doves say that the public was suckered into war by a deceitful White House, and hawks say that the press has since led the public to lose its nerve — but the two sides implicitly agree that the public has been dangerously unsure, or easily propagandized, or ignorant.
One of the cornerstones to a healthy democracy is an educated populace. It seems to me one of the contemporary crises we face is the lack of people who can think through issues without being unduly influenced by party-line political pundits.
Bass goes on to cite economist Bryan Caplan who writes in his book The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies :
“voters are worse than ignorant; they are, in a word, irrational — and vote accordingly.”
I think it’s much more complex than this. I think by the time it comes around to voting, rational thought has long since been thrown out the window. Irrational thinking shapes our daily lives in subtle, subversive ways, in what we say and do, in how we spend our money - in short, in how we choose to live.
So where do we go from here? Caplan proposes a “voter competence test”, giving extra votes to those who demonstrate greater economic literacy. The econonmist Caplan shows his stripes here, of course, elevating his own academic discipline to the highest level. I don’t agree that such a test would necessarily yield better government. I do think, however, we need to discover fresh avenues to help people who vote learn how to think - not just economically and logically, but morally and spiritually.
In the meantime, I guess we just vote the best we can. God help us.
{first published May 29, 2007 in Necessary Therapy}
That closing photo really says it all!
I’ve got quite a bit to say on the subject, but it would turn into a rant. Suffice it say that Thomas Jefferson saw this inevitable end and spoke of it in his writings. Just because most of our population completes highschool does not mean they are educated.
I think you summed it up fairly well in that last line, God help us.
Who’s this Thomas Jefferson guy to whom Sonja refers? What does he know?
Ahem … kidding.
Seriously, that’s a great post, Pistol. You’re right that people are very easily led a lot of the time. Part of it is that people latch on as supporters of a person or party, rather than people of principle and belief.
For example, I like Mike Huckabee. That shouldn’t mean that I do everything he says … because he’s human and sometimes he’s wrong. I can think of areas of disagreement now (really, I can!). But if I lose the ability to say that I disagree with him, then I’m not acting like an intelligent person anymore.
I want to blame extreme pundits, talk radio, and such … but the only place to put blame, really, is on us as the public. We put up with this stuff.