We
live in an age of smart phones. That's new. But we also live in an
age of dumb people. That's not so new. In fact, it's always been
that way.i
People
speak on their phones while driving. It's illegal in many
jurisdictions, but people do it anyway. Worse than that, however,
there are some who text or read texts. Not only do they turn their
attention away from the road like those on the telephone, but they
turn their vision away as well. And even worse, now that the smart
phones are capable of going on line, the drivers do the same. Until
they go off road, or get into some other kind of accident.
These
are the people who choose our government. So it isn't illogical to
question their judgment.
Our
fellow citizens, however, have other endearing traits, many of which
also worry me but I'll focus on one of them as an example of a
different problem. No sooner did the Affordable Care Act become law
than it became apparent that scams were being developed – systems
that were claimed to be designed to help people navigate through the
system and benefit from it, but were in fact aimed at helping the
scam artists to enrich themselves at the expense of a gullible
public. And there are numerous other frauds, commonly available to
those who answer the telephone at home, answer the doorbell, or use
the internet. The new reality is that you can fall victim to a scam
while you're driving. People are larcenous. Almost all of them to
one degree or another.
It's
a common pastime to “cut corners” when doing your taxes, or to
lie when you're conversing.
White lies – excusable ones – of course. Legality and accuracy
are often considered hindrances to our daily activities and to our
best interests.iii
We can't be bound by what our representatives make into laws –
laws from which they are exempt, or, if that's not the case, which
they, themselves, will break. We, the voters, take it for granted
that all politicians are crooks. We, the voters, forget, however,
that we are the ones who have elected these untrustworthy
representatives. And their intelligence and morality reflect our
own.
There
are a lot of “bad guys” around. When we lived in the wild, under
the “law of the jungle,” there was always fear of those who would
steal from us or kill us, so we established societies, and gave them
the authority to defend us from those within, and those outside of
our country – those who might be a threat to us. At the same time
we established a variety of political systems with different forms of
leadership and different rules under which they operated. And these
systems could often function along with each other. There were
monarchy and religion, benevolent despotism and tyranny, communism
and capitalism, socialism and democracy.
In
our country, since we declared our independence, we have, for the
most part, followed the paths of capitalism and democracy. But for
democracy to work, we rely on an intelligent choice of honest leaders
by those interested in making the system fair, reliable, and wise.
Our electorate should be educated, and it should be eager to
participate in the choice of the members of our government.
Unfortunately, as Winston Churchill said, “The
best argument against democracy
is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.”iv
The only part of that evaluation that is surprising to me is that it
takes five minutes. The real trouble with democracy is demos,
the people.v
Democracy, by definition, is the “rule of the people.” And
people are no damn good.vi
All right. Perhaps I'm being too judgmental. We have to consider
the other issues at play.
Indeed.
Whatever happens, there really are no meaningful democracies that
exist anywhere. Some governments employ democratic principles as
part of their makeup, but, for the most part, we do not employ true
democracy. The ideal of all of the people voting on all issues isn't
even followed in Switzerland, which is famed as a “direct
democracy.''vii
Although there may be a greater opportunity there than elsewhere for
the public to express opinion, Switzerland is largely a
representative democracy as is true of “democracies” elsewhere –
a republicviii
like ours.
The
most generous appraisal of the reality of the situation is that most
of the citizens of these republics – indeed, most people in or out
of these republics – have little knowledge of the mechanics of
government. They often accept as fact anything they're told by
politicians with a vested interest in being elected. People tend to
attribute to elected officials both knowledge and wisdom they may not
have. Consequently they are confused by the interpretations of many
different “experts” who have different ideologies and give
conflicting “information” and advice to the voters. Sadly, the
electorate is not well informed. Churchill's average voter has a
wide variety of problems working against good judgment.
But,
of course, other systems are based on the participation of the same
people, and the flaws of all of those systems will be just as
impervious to cure as the ones that plague democracy –
as long as people run them. Which means always. So however bad
democracy is, and, among other things, it breeds the tyranny of the
majority, the tyranny of the minority, bureaucracy, programs that
mean a huge debt for our descendants, corrupt politicians,
unqualified leaders, bickering, and the burdens engendered by all the
human failings that we, and our representatives have, all the other
systems have the same problems as well, along with their own inherent
defects.
And
among those “inherent defects” is the fact that the philosophy
and leadership tend to be fixed or possibly inherited. So if, for
example, you disagree with the philosophy and decisions of a
dictator, you lose. There's no peaceful way to change things. If
you live in a socialist system and have the ambition to improve your
situation, you probably won't be able to move higher than someone who
lacks the same drive. And if there is a state religion different
from yours, you may be treated as a second class citizen if you don't
convert.ix
Churchill
also declared, “It has been said that democracy
is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms
that have been tried from time to time."x
At least the citizens of a democracy have the right to change
governments when they disagree with what is being done. They might
be foolish to do so but it is their right – as long as their
government remains a democracy. We can always choose the lesser of
evils.
All
we really need to get rid of the problem entirely, though, is to
practice democracy where there are no people.
Next
episode: “Amazing Greece”
– How contentious it is.
i And
it's been the rule in all places as well, I'll be discussing our
country primarily, but the same phenomena exist around the world.
People have the same quirks, frailties, and limitations everywhere.
ii Everybody
does it.
iii One
of our prime goals is to benefit ourselves with as little effort is
possible. So we're easy prey to those who want our money, just as
others are seen by us as the prey who will help make us wealthy. We
buy lottery tickets, go to some casino or other, take chances on
accidents in order to save a few seconds, mislead those with whom we
negotiate, use “sick” time when we want to get a day off and be
paid for it, and other similar acts when we think we can get away
with them. After all, everybody does it.
iv In
addition to being an outstanding British Prime Minister, Churchill
was a well-respected warrior, painter, rhetorician, and writer. The
quotation cited is one of many aphorisms that accurately described
the situation in the world around him and us. Unfortunately I have
not been able to locate its source.
v A
typical definition (in this case from Wikipedia) of the term is “The
ordinary citizens of an ancient Greek city-state, considered as a
political entity; population; the common people.” In this essay I
refer to the people. It's the same root as is used in “demography.”
vii “Direct Democracy can be defined as a form or system of democracy giving citizens an extraordinary amount of participation in the legislation process and granting them a maximum of political self-determination.” So says the web site “Direct-democracy.geschichte-schweiz.ch. That definition doesn't include what many others do – a popular vote on all issues.
viii A
republic is generally considered to be a representative democracy
but the term may be applied to any nation that is not a monarchy.
ix And
in some instances, even if you do.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I know you agree, but you can leave comments anyway.