Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed

by BooMan
Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 01:11:47 AM EST

One thing political scientists, and a lot of other people, don't seem to understand is that representative government is not the best possible system of government because the majority of the voting public is well-informed, altruistic, or wise. The will of the people can be for really stupid and/or immoral things. The reason we need representative government is because it is a self-correcting system. People regret voting for Bush twice but they are not going to vote for a Republican this time around in light of the results they got from Bush.

Or maybe they will. But eventually they will correct for their own errors. And you don't get that in a dictatorship or a monarchy. If you want efficiency, authoritarian governments can provide it for a time. But tyranny is a bad form of government because it does not allow for an orderly change of course.

Yes, we can improve on the performance of our government by improving on the overall intelligence and education of the electorate. But the system works better than any other in spite of the innate weaknesses and ignorance of the general public.

So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (4.00 / 7)

Well said.

However, when it is in the interest of political factions to keep the public ignorant and ill-informed, the system breaks.

Liberal Democracy requires Enlightened values, first among them a commitment to quality universal education for the populace. I don't see a lot of commitment to that from our politicians, who have been infected by business-speak.

They say the best way to learn something is to teach it. No allowance is made for the damage done to students.

by Migeru on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 02:57:24 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Add in the fact that big money can manipulate the media (and thus elections) to ensure that candidates of either party do their bidding and the entire system becomes a farce. The seeds of this were planted at the very beginnings of the republic, if you look at the conflicting worldviews of Jefferson versus Hamilton, and whose worldview is most in evidence in the America of today.

A poorly educated electorate and centralization of wealth and power are mutually-reinforcing trends which spiral down into the pit of autocracy - which in the end destroys the wealthy and powerful as surely as the "unwashed masses."

In the broadest scheme of things, this may be because technological innovation (in effect, less expensive energy), another fruit of education, provides the broadly-distributed wealth that acts as a counterforce to this trend towards consolidation of power. Declining education strangles the goose that lays the golden egg both in terms of a population educated to rule itself wisely and in terms of a citizenry with the disposable income to be unswayed by empty promises of cheap fixes with quick payoffs but long-term problems. Expanded oil drilling is perhaps the best example currently, but the concept applies to examples from the Roman "bread and circuses" to the American "a chicken in every pot" (The latter phrase, commonly attributed to Hoover's 1928 campaign, actually goes back to 17th century France, when King Henry IV reputedly wished that each of his peasants would enjoy "a chicken in his pot every Sunday.")

It may be that a republic is ultimately not sustainable without ever greater resource utilization, although in the near term greater energy efficiency can buy us some time to develop spaceflight into a technology which is capable of taking us over the next hurdle. (Gulp: I'm starting to sound like Robert Heinlein!)

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

by Knoxville Progressive (green_planet_2000 (at) yahoo (dot) com) on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 at 10:00:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (4.00 / 3)

I believe in the wisdom of crowds. Which means: democracy should work even though people are stupid and ill-informed, as long as they are INDEPENDENTLY stupid and ill-informed. Because a lot of dumb but independent processors, when averaged, usually gives you a pretty smart answer.

The problems come in when people's judgements are not independent--for example, when they are too heavily influenced by an overwhelming and uniform propaganda machine (e.g. Fox News), which tells them over and over again to ignore the evidence of their own eyes. More generally: the efficacy of democracy in an era of mass media is unclear.

by rae on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 08:33:18 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

I believe in the wisdom of crowds...

that's quite a statement, and l disagree with the sentiment. if the history of much of the past 60 years is any indication, crowds generally devolve into a tyranny of the majority mindset, starting with the "mccarthyism" that ran rampant in the 50's.

granted, it has been disowned by the powers that be, but the attitudes that fomented it's ascension are just as prevalent today as then. the xenophobia, the extreme polarization of opinion and discourse over the war in iraq, where if you didn't/don't support it you're an appeaser, sympathizer, or worse yet, a traitor.

stupid is as stupid does. give me an educated populace over a crowd...or perhaps, more appropriately, a mob...everytime. it's been so long since we had one, l've forgotten what it looks like.

l would add that it's not just faux news, it's the entire "marketing based, info-tainment" megalith that the entire spectrum of the msm has [d]evolved into.

perhaps it's too early to judge what the potential for correction is, should this election turn out as many here believe it will...or should. but it's quite clear, at least to me, that "the crowds" haven't done a very good job of coming up with "smart answers" for over a quarter century.

the revolution will not be televised...

by dada on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 09:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Well, the term "wisdom of crowds" can be misleading, because crowds are only "wise" when the people in them act independently. If they aren't independent, then the crowd becomes a mob, and mobs are dumber than the sum of their parts, not smarter. But a large number of not-very-bright but independent decision-makers can give you a good decision, if you have a way of aggregating their opinion, i.e. voting.

by rae on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:19:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (4.00 / 2)

[I would first like to say, that taken across all votes, the American public does rather well in decision making as group, despite failing generally as individuals. The fact that a few people can manipulate nation elections now is not their fault, so don't use the 2 time Bush argument.]

It is the conceit of the above diary, posing as a defense of our current system, that the American people are idiots rescued by the form of their government.

I sort of agree that Americans, and people in general, are indeed idiots, judging by their individual behavior. I also agree our system is self-correcting. For this it is indeed 'Awesome.'

However, you must agree that the presumption that a gang of idiots is no smarter than the average idiot is a fallacy. In fact it's a pretty dumb idea. We are surround by examples of 'Emergence' in our everyday lives that prove this point wrong: from Ant colonies to our own brains, weak and stupid things get together and apply their stupidity en masse with incredible results.

This 'Fallacy of the American Idiot' has been used by any number of folks to prevent real democratic reform to our system, which has been moving power out of the peoples' hands consistently for generations. The Left use an elitist approach: we are so in tune with the little guy only one our most elite elites can serve them best. The Right use it for their paternalism: Y'all are idiots and we are 'The Man' so do what we say. I feel the elitism dripping 'round here.

A million people making stoopid decisions together may actually be the very BEST way to come to the correct decision. This principal is used on a lot of your computers right now if you participate in a bit torrent system or have the SETI-at-Home screen saver running. Emergence is one of the most exciting fields of scientific research right now. Maybe it will seep into Political Science eventually..

So thanks for that. </snark>

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 08:56:09 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (4.00 / 2)

So what you are saying is:

Give credit to humans, to all creatures for making mistakes and evolving beyond those mistakes, for learning, gaining wisdom through experience.

The Progressive Movement of the late 1800's and early 1900's is proof positive of the strength of the people to take back their ideals and implement them for themselves. This took many years, and was only partially accomplished, but left an indelible mark on American history, culminating with the New Deal and it's humanitarian bent.

The neocon/neoliberal Milton Friedman Chicago School of Economics ideal is driven by the opposite -- profit and self-interest at the expense of humanitarianism. This we've been sold as our new business model, now for the last 30 years. Many nations around the globe had this viciously shoved up their asses under the guise of economic shock therapy.

It is up to the people, once again, to wrest the ideal away from selfishness and return it to sharing, to humanitarian and planetarian kindness and prosperity for all living beings.

It is only natural, buried in our genes, buried in our destinies, for all creatures to evolve, and that is our divine right. No neocon selfishness is ever going to stop that permanently. They have their secure world penned-in nightmare luxury lifestyle burned inside their forebrains, but it's unsustainable, and will die. Unfortunately, these neocon monsters want the rest of us to die with their folly.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 09:45:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Poetry! (none / 0)

They have their secure world penned-in nightmare luxury lifestyle burned inside their forebrains, but it's unsustainable, and will die.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 04:29:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Agree. This is the point I was trying to make above.

by rae on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:21:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Emergence Rocks! (none / 0)

And is one of the reasons I have faith in the idea of 'Line Item Tax Allocation' where we all get to allocate our tax payment to various gov't budgets on our 1040s.

While I have no doubt people taken as individuals will make ridiculous allocations, all together we'd work it out.. and democratize the self-correction our system has at it's core.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 04:50:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Emergence Rocks! (none / 0)

Now that's radical politics!!

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:32:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (4.00 / 2)

Nothing like a big dose of sentimental patriotism to make your breakfast want to make a round trip.

What system is it that "works better than any other"? Democracy? Yeah, that may be true, but I can't immediately think of any nation on the planet that doesn't have some kind of voting, so why is this even worth talking about? Are you seeing some huge movement to install a king or military dictator? (Opps, done that, are there.) The issue is not democracy as a model, but how well each example of it works. The one in the US comes in at the dysfunctional end of the scale.

Nor is the issue the capability of the electorate. That is simply a consequence of the system itself. A system like that in the US is best defined as open, legalized bribery supported by a two-party duopoly that stays in power by granting the minimal concessions needed to keep the money machine grinding -- essentially the same strategy employed by military dictators and other openly authoritarian systems.

I'm fully rooting for Obama and the Dems because they're clearly the better of the available choices. I'm far less expectant that their triumph will herald in an "orderly change of course" of any significance. That would require the elimination of the bribery that defines our system. Do you think there's any chance that Obama and a Dem Congress will end the rule of money in elections? If not, it's hard to see how any of the life-and-death questions we now face will be adequately addressed.

But at least David Broder must be applauding you right now.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

by DaveW on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 11:53:36 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

you're not the only person in this thread that misread what I wrote. I talked about 'representative government', not 'democracy' not our system vs. parliamentary systems.

The point of representative government is not that the people will come to better conclusions than a senate of philosopher-kings. For the most part, decision making is best left to experts. But representative government ultimately overcomes this weakness by providing an orderly system of change. While voters are vulnerable to demagoguery they do ultimately grow sick of government that doesn't work for them. Political action also provides an avenue for hope and progress within the rule of law. The advantages of this are best seen from what happens in countries where political action is sharply curtailed or plainly pointless.

Freedom of assembly and speech are vitally important to creating a consent of the governed, even when people are not supportive of the government in power.

The bottom line is that representative government will yield the best results when the populace has access to good information, is well-educated, civic-minded, and actually participates at high levels. But even lacking these things, this form of government is still superior to systems that lack representative government. And there are plenty of those, even if they give lip-service to having elections.

by BooMan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 12:31:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

If representative government is so good, maybe we oughta try it. Our system primarily represents money, not citizens. It is further corrupted by overtly anti-democratic obstructions like the electoral college, gerrymandering, the two-party oligarchy, and the totally unrepresentative makeup of the Senate -- not to mention the more subtle corruptions like media access and dysfunctional campaign/electoral setups.

At a more philosophical level, you assert without evidence that "an orderly system of change" is de facto an unmixed blessing. Depends on how much change you think is essential. At best, history seems to show that our system is better described as "an orderly system for minimal change". We'll see whether the system this time reverses the very real, and little-resisted, destruction of fundamental liberty in this country. If what we get is a half-step back to the 90s, we may have to get back into the mindset of the unrepresentative revolutionaries that founded this nation.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

by DaveW on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 01:05:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

The American system is intentionally conservative. That's why the Senate was created the way it was, originally without direct elections and with only a third of the body accountable in each election.

You may dislike the system but it is doing what it was designed to do. There are plenty of unstable parliamentary systems (most famously, Italy) that are dysfunctional because they lack stability and consistency in the law.

America moves slowly and resists radical change for a reason. The Founders thought the best system of government was a balance between the passion of the people and the informed consent of a landed elite.

It may take us longer to change things but it is also harder to knock us severely off-course. The Bush administration has been the first true test of our system since Nixon. So far, the system has failed. But the self-correcting part is coming. We'll see how far the spirit of reform will go.

by BooMan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 01:12:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

I'm well aware of what the system is designed for: essentially to ensure rule by rich white men. At which it has succeeded remarkably well.

If you want to just assume that adequate self-correction is coming, that's certainly your privilege. IMO, Clinton and a Dem congress failed miserably to achieve the needed change. We still suffer and decline as a result of the Reaganism that continues to infect both parties. With Reaganism, America moved fast and there was no effective resistance to radical change. Unlike the New Deal or the Great Society, this was accomplished in the absence of any important crisis. I think the past quarter century tells us that the current political system is fully as dysfunctional as Italy's or any other parliamentary system you care to bring up. The difference is the amount of national wealth we've had available to postpone the consequnces of the radicalism we bought into. That huge bank account is largely squandered now, so we'll see how well the system corrects without the cushion.

FDR's response to progressive demands: "I agree. Now go out and make me do it."

by DaveW on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 02:15:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

A couple of thoughts:

Unlike the New Deal or the Great Society, this [the Reagan Revolution] was accomplished in the absence of any important crisis.

At the time there was a perception of crisis, of America at the edge of a cliff, due to the combination of high inflation, high unemployment, OPEC flexing its muscle, high urban crime, "declining morals" and a world split between two nuclear powers capable of blowing the whole thing to smithereens. Even the president was on TV talking of "American Malaise." In other words, a time ripe for radical change.

I think the past quarter century tells us that the current political system is fully as dysfunctional as Italy's or any other parliamentary system you care to bring up.

It seems to me the problem is not an Italian-style impetuously-changing dysfunctionality but a USSR-style sclerotic system incapable of changing to meet the current challenges we face (like the need to fight climate change, provide health care to the population, develop alternative energy sources, etc.). And if nature tells us anything, it is that what cannot change, dies.

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

by Knoxville Progressive (green_planet_2000 (at) yahoo (dot) com) on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 at 10:20:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

I agree with what you write, but on the last point, I don't believe every nation on earth either wants or should be a representative government. Maybe in some far-off, very civilized world deep into the New Age, but for now, each nation has a unique expression of itself, via government and culture, and it's not up to me to support my national destiny to be blanketed over to others.

As an aside, the American people have been white-washed by "spreading democracy" over and over again, when the real "spreading" has been economic pillage. I think it's dangerous for one nation to impose it's political and economic will on another when the imposed nation has it's own destiny to fulfill.

I was bad at sports as a kid, and I was forced and cajoled to go out there and embarrass myself on the basketball court and baseball field. It was humiliating for me, and it was imposed by my father and the ideals of what males should be doing, else you were an outcast. What was best for some kids was not best for me. Same thing happens between nations.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:40:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

I don't believe every nation on earth either wants or should be a representative government.

This is a fascinating question to me. If there is such a thing as "human nature", it would seem that some forms of government would be a better match for allowing the full flowering of that nature than others, and we should support the spread of the best possible government (not necessarily ours, of course).

Or are some forms best under one set of circumstances at meeting human needs, and others best in other situations? For example, might an autocracy be best when a society as a whole is at a low place on Maslow's hierarchy of needs and a freer system when resources are more available? Look at how many nations tried to establish democracies in the post-colonial period last century, and ended up autocracies (and many of which then ended up trying democracy again...). What do these examples tell us?

Franklin said "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety," but then, portraits of Ol' Ben uniformly show him to be well-fed.

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

by Knoxville Progressive (green_planet_2000 (at) yahoo (dot) com) on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 at 10:35:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

I'm not sure the hierarchy of needs is the right metric.

If a country is ethnically and religiously capable of stability then representative government is preferable. It can even help ethnic and religious minorities accept their minority status if their rights are respected and they have some representation. But if there is too much acrimony or the majority is seen as illegitimate, then you need to put security first, and that involves curtailing people's freedoms. It's actually kind of rare to have a country with enough homogeneousness to function with full minority rights and full liberty.

Even countries like Spain and Ireland have had trouble achieving this.

by BooMan on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 at 10:44:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

Good point. The rethugs have done their best to block that self-correction, and would have succeeded had they not foolishly taken the nation into two wars it cannot win. If they had stuck to their bread and butter, which is robbing the rest of us, they would have made out just fine. A hundred and fifty years of post-bellum Southern history is good evidence of that.

Knut

by Knut Wicksell (b_didnn@hotmail.ca) on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 07:24:21 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

How many years have we been playing the politics of identity and fear rather than substance? Several generations of us voters are used to that since that's all we know. Substance goes out the window as dull and un-interesting. We've suffered for that.

Recommended by Hideo Kojima

by robertdsc on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 07:31:35 AM EST

j'accuse! (none / 1)

You can't possibly believe this, because just a few weeks ago you wrote:

these are the three great errors that prevent progressives for attaining power. These are three of the four lethal cynicisms.
The first lethal cynicism is the conviction that the people are too stupid, too susceptible, and too selfish to be counted upon to do the right thing. It's really a lack of faith in the whole concept that the Will of the People, as expressed through a majority (or plurality) vote, will give us satisfactory results.

...and added in comments that you wrote that piece with me in mind.

OTOH, your core argument, that representative government is a self-correctign system, stands, but in the context of the US's two-party, winner take all system, not so much as say a Parliamentary system.

Another problem of course is that the political class has become a very wealthy, self-interested class that doesn't represent the people as well as it could, and that elections have become an incumbency protection racket.

John Mccain Called his wife WHAT??

by brendan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 07:45:06 AM EST

Re: j'accuse! (none / 1)

The 1% political class only represents itself. The 99% are irrelevant except as hand maidens, butlers, landscapers and a tax base to pay for their wealth acquisition through graft and corruption in government.

The political class "doesn't represent the people as well as it could", they don't represent the people at all. "The People" is just a marketing fantasy taught to us from the get-go, and is a long-sustaining non-reality. The "people" are like the axlotl tanks in the Dune series of sci-fi, birthing repilcants.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 09:27:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: j'accuse! (none / 1)

believe it or not, brendan, I believe both of those comments and they actually explain each other. The key is time frame. I trust the people to do the right thing eventually, not every time.

by BooMan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 09:44:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

The British seem to enjoy a standard of living on a par with ours. Their civil liberties are mostly protected. The have freedom of speech, religion and assembly. They have a multi-party Parlimentary government. Had we such a system Bush at various times would have surely fallen out of power through a no confidence vote. A nation lashed to a leader with approval ratings in the 20th percentile is not a good thing. How is our system so much better than Britain's? On numerous occasions about 60% of the U.S. would have killed to have a do-over on either the 2000 or 2004 elections.

by steve duncan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:00:07 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Well, the poeple of England are the most surveilled people on earth.

On the other hand,

No other nation on earth has adopted our system of government; most transforming or emerging nations choosing democracy have chosen a parliamentary system. We may have been first in modern times to create a democracy, but no one seems to think that our Bicameral/checks-and-balances/Executive/Two Party system is worth imitating.

Share. Share resources, share delight, share burdens, share the healing. Sharing will bring us back from mass suicide. www.share-international.org

by Isis on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:29:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

U.S. citizens are probably surveilled to a far greater extent than those in Britain. Much is made of the per capita spy cameras over there. I might choose the government to possess a fleeting image of me passing in front of a store over a data mining operation that monitors my cell phone, land lines, bank accounts, medical activity, purchasing habits, mail, travel arrangements and another dozen metrics I'm unaware of. As lame as our intelligence services sometimes seem I doubt MI5/SIS has a leg up on the NSA/CIA/DIA/FBI when it comes to snooping on domestic targets. You aren't even safe from local and state police, as evidenced by Maryland's labeling of peace activists as terrorists and their subsequent trailing about town.

by steve duncan on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:47:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

If the US gov't tried to take us directly to the 'rights' of the Brits, there would be revolution.

Just start with their justice system.. Don't you like presumed innocence?

Freedom of the Press? Check their libel laws.

Freedom to bear arms in defense against your own gov't? Please.

Declaring the bottom is the only way back up..

by anarchronarchist (mincers (-at-) hotmail (-dot-) com) on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 04:53:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

William Jacoby, (none / 0)

one of the authors, is a good friend of mine. We both went to the same grad school but he was in poli sci while I was not. We did work for 2 years behind the Help Desk helping people with their SAS problems, or SPSS, or whatever. Bill is a sharp cookie, and an excellent magician.

by dataguy on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:31:58 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 1)

The more democratic the form of government, the more effort the autocrats and oligarchs will use to manipulate the public and dumb down public discourse. The methods of "perception management" developed in the United States are far more sophisticated and effective than those used in the Nazi or Soviet systems, where force was a bigger factor and it didn't really matter if you believed what they said, just so long as you didn't make trouble. In a free system -- "free" in form, if not in function -- not believing is almost synonymous with making trouble. In the largely calvinist-tinged official culture of the United States, faith comes before all else. And that's probably why we see so many moves away from democracy recently -- faith in these con-artists is repidly breaking down.
In spite of this, I still believe Abraham Lincoln was right, that "You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time." Of course, the oligarchs are betting they don't have to fool all of the people all the time, just enough of the people enough of the time. But I think the odds are against them.

by priscianus jr on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 10:59:17 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Bah. The edge that democracy has over other forms of government is that it allows elites to have an orderly transition of power from one to another without devolving into messy civil war or revolution. That's all.

Other forms of government are "self correcting" as well - just not peacefully. They generally "self correct" through violent and bloody war, rather than a peaceful handover of power when the rules say that change is occurring. Revolutionaries can work their way up through the rungs of power by "following the rules" rather than by organizing their own armies.

That's the big difference between monarchy or dictatorship and democracy. Concessions to the "public good" are only needed to keep the common rabble at a level of contentedness that they aren't willing to threaten what they have by revolution. (FDR and his cohorts understood this - Presidents and Congressmen since at least Reagan have not.)

by nonynony on Thu Jul 24th, 2008 at 11:55:26 AM EST

Re: So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed (none / 0)

Your point about FDR is well made and under-appreciated. American history as taught has FDR creating Social Security and the other New Deal reforms out of a wise, generous, and benevolent paternalism, but at the time it was more out of a desire to prevent the country from going any more towards either Socialism or Fascism, both tendencies which were occurring worldwide at the time in response to human desperation.

Ecological collapse is already happening. Your resentment of the word doesn't change the fact that it is occurring.

by Knoxville Progressive (green_planet_2000 (at) yahoo (dot) com) on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 at 10:40:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

So the Public is Stupid and Ill-Informed | 33 comments (33 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Senator Edward M. Kennedy tells his extraordinary personal story:

True Compass: A Memoir
by Edward M. Kennedy.

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

Boran2 and maryb2004 recommend:

The Big Over Easy: A Nursery Crime
by Jasper Fforde

Must-have information for all presidents-and citizens-of the twenty-first century?

Physics for Future Presidents: The Science behind the Headlines
Richard A. Muller

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
by Doris Kearns Goodwin

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.

Technorati Profile