Democracy and Ignorance

Post Reply New Topic

I wouldn't have used the U.K. vote to leave the European Union as an example of politico-governmental ignorance.

While Jefferson did, indeed, write about a "well informed" people in his 1789 letter to Richard Price, he also added in the same letter that "I did not at first believe that 11. states of 13. would have consented to a plan consolidating them as much into one. a change in their dispositions, which had taken place since I left them, had rendered this consolidation necessary, that is to say, had called for a federal government which could walk upon it's own legs, without leaning for support on the state legislatures." Jefferson clearly saw the reality of separating the authorities of competing governments.

After all, Jefferson also wrote in a 1798 letter to Peregrine Fitzhugh that "I do not think it for the interest of the general government itself, & still less of the Union at large, that the state governments should be so little respected as they have been. however I dare say that in time all these as well as their central government, like the planets revolving round their common Sun, acting & acted upon according to their respective weights & distances, will produce that beautiful equilibrium on which our constitution is founded, and which I believe it will exhibit to the world in a degree of perfection unexampled but in the planetary system itself."

This quote suggests strongly that Jefferson supported multiple decentralized state governments as a counterbalance to a centralized federal government. As such, it is unlikely that Jefferson would have supported the European Union with its overarching blend of national sovereignties, and erasure of their internal borders and boundaries among other disagreeable policies. No; what Jefferson advocated for the United States of America is neither what the European Union was intended to be nor what it has become.

Forgive me, but what does any of this have to do with whether or not a democracy requires informed participation? That is my point in citing the original quote, and this thread is about nothing else.

A meaningless, subjective diatribe. The leave vote was disproportionately cast by older, less educated voters. Dispute this, or you have no basis for your diatribe. Less educated people do less research. Again, dispute this with objective, FACT based research or you have nothing to say but SUBJECTIVE, useless trolling. I do not say stupid people, I say ignorant people. Ignorance can be cured, as yours can be cured. Come to fact side, Luke.

My basic fact remained undisputed. The leave vote was disproportionately cast by older, less educated voters.

While you're at it, get this thread back on track, which is about American democracy. Dispute the Annenberg study I cited in my OP, which PROVES the ignorance of the American voter.

Hi BirdInFlight

I don't know about anyone else, but I certainly do "have a dog in this race," just a different but similar race you see.

One reason for Brexit, I understand, was concerning the free import of labor from other countries; both low level manual labor and technical labor....I hope I have this right.

In the United States our government, by turning a blind eye to illegal immigration, (rather they actively promote it) we now have something like 12,000,000 (twelve million...you could fill a good sized city or entire county) illegal aliens in our country to take American jobs...and all the big tech companies here are importing techies from other countries as fast as as they can, displacing Americans from their jobs................I feel I can relate to British angst and although mine is similar, I can not "share" yours,; this is true..

As control over trade was taken from British hands I thought about the trade agreements forced on us recently by Obama and friends...much of our manufacturing capacity is gone....away to other countries. When I saw the same happening to our good friends "over there" I felt sorry for you and reflected on our "disaster by Democracy."

Please don't judge all of us cowboys the same...we all have different "brands." Yahoo!

Last edited by ZenDen on 16 Jul 2016, 4:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A quick question?

I just wondered Eben; in your contention above you assert: "My basic fact remained undisputed. The leave vote was disproportionately cast by older, less educated voters." I'm not sure what you mean by "less educated? Is it these older voters did not educate themselves in the details of Brexit and just voted their hearts? Or are you saying simply the older people (that built your country) are just a bunch of uneducated louts not fit to vote properly? Please elucidate.

Thank you.

That's a separate point to the one I was making. You used a news story reporting how there had been a spike in "what is the EU?" google searches shortly after the EU referendum as evidence for the ignorance of the 17 million people who had voted to leave. I pointed out that was ridiculous since (i) you don't know which way those google searchers voted, or if they voted at all, and (ii) the reported 'spike' in searches corresponded to only about 1,000 people actually asking the question.

First of all, you say "that built my country". If by that you believe I am a citizen of Great Britain, I am not. I am an American, from Noo Yawk City.

Second, I am not defining "less educated". This is the term used by those who evaluate/break down the vote. It refers to the highest grade level completed by the voter. In the US we say grade-school/Middle School/High School/College/Post Graduate. I don't know how it breaks down in GB, but the same principle applies. Less formal education. The "leave" voters have been equated to the Donald Trump voters in the so-called "rust belt" states which have lost so many manufacturing votes. Frankly, I agree with people who think we should have protected these people and protected our manufacturing base. Donald Trump is exploiting their perfectly understandable anger. They have been abandoned. Unfortunately, less educated people are less educated. They can recognize that they've been screwed, but they can't quite figure out how or why. Mention Gerrymandering to these people, and they'd go "whua?". They are more easily susceptible to demagoguery, to people who exploit their anger and xenophobia.

"Voted their heart?" Seriously? Do you really think that is a rational thing to say, cause I can't recall ever hearing a less rational term applied to the voting process. Please refer to the Fran Lebowitz quote in the OP. I'm not suggesting that the subjective has no place in voting, but it's only one of many evaluating factors which must be included in the thinking behind the voting process, if voting is to be more than merely throwing darts at a board.

I concede the completely unscientific nature of "Google Trends". I do not concede the far more important reality that less educated voters made this decision. If you find a spike in these search terms unrelated to ignorant voting, I have to ask why? If you believe that less educated voters are more informed and more thoughtful, I must disagree. Anti-intellectualism and a belief that education is unimportant is, to me, absurd on the face of it. If you wish to be an anti-education champion, have at it.

I think a big part of the problem is the dishonesty we see in the media. Also, in general, skepticism doesn't seem to be encouraged very often. It's actually quite the opposite; the skeptics who criticize others' ideas are often met with emotional responses instead of rational ones, as people tend to identify so closely with their views that any criticism of those views feels like a personal attack. Political parties and ideas are followed religiously by many people, rather than on the basis of a logical conclusion about them.

It certainly does seem to me like this describes a majority of people. I can see some logical reasons that people might have voted to leave the EU, but I agree that it's very ridiculous that people decided to make an uninformed "symbolic vote" on such a significant issue. Especially when the population was so divided on it. The whole point of a symbolic vote is that you know the position won't win, but you vote for it anyway.

Ignorance is everywhere. That's why the two most-hated candidates in history are the presumptive nominees. It's so simple to see Hillary's lies and obvious crimes by doing a quick Google search. Trump only seems consistent because he doesn't take many specific stances on the issues, and instead uses empty rhetoric and general ideas that sound good to his target voters, but that ultimately don't mean much. It's quite easy to see, but nobody takes the time to look.

Unfortunately, with the rise of far right political stars like Palin, Bachmann, and a certain current Presidential candidate, ignorance is seen as just being one of the people and something to be proud of, whereas education is denigrated as elitist. With the rise of politicians who parrot the anti-scientific, homophobic, racist ignorance of their core followers from the fringes of society, they are demonstrating how we - or at least a segment of our population - are not fit for democracy.

One of many plausible answers is that the increase in searches was caused by schools setting EU related assignments and homework for their students, or that the hullabaloo led under 18's to find out what all the fuss was about.

To latch onto a single point of data and claim a specific outcome would be an indicator of a poor understanding of logic. And on that note:



The remain voters were younger and less experienced, a far more important factor when making political decisions. This is much the same reasoning used to explain most Age of Candidacy rules. The only relevant education (beyond a lifetime of experience) regarding Brexit issued forth from the mouths of inept politicians who were, more often than not, spewing out fear-mongering messages that were more transparent than a heroically scrubbed window. As such, the referendum was best understood by autodidacts who took the time to understand the form and function of the EU for themselves. What data, precisely, do you have regarding the number of voters from either camp who fit this description?

Assuming your bluster about the studying of logic implies that you have done so yourself, I'm sure you've taken the time to understand the other significant factors in play - especially the differences in wealth, geographic location and the overarching political landscape in the UK, no?

You also seem to be making the additional assumption that, while all the leave voters were illiterate, uneducated buffoons, your typical remain voter had stellar credentials and is beyond reproach. Otherwise you would, as I tend to, assume that the idiots in any democratic endeavour will largely cancel each other out.

Now, much as I'd happily accept the mantle of "Emperor of Earth" were it offered, I am (for once) completely satisfied with the outcome of the Brexit referendum, the fruits of which will not come to bear for many, many years.



Define "far right".

^^^
Far Right -
Political thought that believes the free market should operate unhindered by regulations because businesses who pollute or endanger their customers or employees will eventually go out of business due to market forces, and without government interference. At no time in history has this ever been demonstrated to be true.
That a social safety net only encourages indolence, and allows the non-productive to survive. The far right always denigrates those in need of said safety net as takers and eaters.
Believes in tax cuts for the rich and big business, on the theory that the rich will always do the right thing and reinvest this saved money in order to hire more people, rather than selfishly putting it in the bank.
Cheers on the beneficence of capitalism for raising people out of poverty, yet are all for breaking unions, sending business overseas for the sake of low wages and no regulations, and keeping the minimum wage low, creating a permanent American underclass.
Will bray about how they are the party of democracy, but will enact voter suppression to keep minorities from voting, rather than care about the concerns of said minorities in order to keep their voting base who are known for racism.
Beat their chests to defend traditional family values, which is just code for discriminating against LGBT Americans.
Talk constantly about how they are representative of the average mainstream American, but court fringe groups, such as the evangelical religious right, the Sons of Confederate Veterans, the Tea Party, and the Wise Use movement.
I could go on and on, but dinner is getting ready.

Last edited by Kraichgauer on 16 Jul 2016, 8:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

A perfectly valid alternative explanation for that googlevent. Nothing can alter the fact that the actual vote for leaving was cast by older, less educated voters. If you want to argue that less education is good for democracy, go ahead, but that is the subject of this thread. My contention is that ignorance is bad for democracy, and the quotes in my OP uphold that principle in the words of great American leaders. Dispute them, why don't you? Jefferson and FDR. Informed participation is the most basic foundation for democracy.

This is assuming incredibly unfair proportions. My OP is about America, and I regrexit mentioning anything outside the confines of that country. I was hardly the first to equate "leave" voters to Trump voters, but look at the Annenberg study mentioned in my OP. Ignorance is an indisputable fact of life in the US, and the low voter turnout we have here is one of the only factors that increases the level of knowledge of the average American voter. The concept of the autodidact is an interesting one, and I can hardly see how anyone could fail to believe that people who have enjoyed more formal education are more able to define their own studies of subjects outside of a formal learning context. They have a great deal more training in how to use libraries and the internet. They have more experience in outlining such studies. Education is a good thing, and I don't understand people who argue against it. Education is essential to democracy. I do not understand anyone who argues otherwise. Perhaps you can explain how ignorance is good for democracy?

So you like to use someone else's terms as though they have meaning for you.
And you never think to check what this means to Britons, yet you base an argument
on it, and it's meaning......What kind of rational thinking is this?

You say:
"The "leave" voters have been equated to the Donald Trump voters in the so-called "rust belt" states which have lost so many manufacturing votes." Yes, and we've lost jobs in the U.S. to many 3rd world countries through trade agreements as well....just the kind of thing "Leave" voters were trying to avoid. And this drives up unemployment. Do you dispute this?

You mention "Leave" voters have less formal education. But you can't equate this with intelligence. Would you suggest voting rights based on intelligence? How crude.

AND then you say: "Frankly, I agree with people who think we should have protected these people and protected our manufacturing base."
How would you do this with another group of countries/legislators, in charge, thinking differently?

AND go on to say: "Unfortunately, less educated people are less educated. They can recognize that they've been screwed, but they can't quite figure out how or why. Mention Gerrymandering to these people, and they'd go "whua?". They are more easily susceptible to demagoguery, to people who exploit their anger and xenophobia."

Ahhhh..so the more fortunate (perhaps more wealthy?) who have a fine education, will protect these other poor people (kind of like sheep when you think about it..right?) from themselves by partially nullifying part of their vote..is that what you suggest?

You say: ""Voted their heart?" Seriously? Do you really think that is a rational thing to say, cause I can't recall ever hearing a less rational term applied to the voting process. Please refer to the above.

And you say: "I'm not suggesting that the subjective has no place in voting, but it's only one of many evaluating factors which must be included in the thinking behind the voting process, if voting is to be more than merely throwing darts at a board."
And so you would have us erroneously assume (as you do) that less formal education means these people will not think about or discuss a topic before making up their minds?????

How absurd....can you show your research that show this true? Or do you just like to make this kind of statement?

You ask: ""Voted their heart?" Seriously?" Yes ""Voted their heart Seriously." You see, in The United States of America we consider things slightly differently (if we're lucid at the time) because nowhere in the Constitution does it say people with less education should be treated less than equals (except the shame of the slavery issue which we are still trying to correct)...you see that's pretty much the whole point, whether you're from "Noo Yawk City" or elsewhere you are allowed to vote any way you wish and none shall take away this right (that's the theory)....don't they teach these things where you live?

You know, this is about the silliest discussion I've ever had. Read the OP again. You are defending ignorance. Why? You are contradicting the statements of Jefferson and FDR. Why? I'm done with you. Show you understand what they wrote. Dispute what they wrote. Dispute THEIR words, not your absurd misunderstanding of mine. That's what this thread is about. Their understanding of the needs of democracy. I'm done arguing with champions of ignorance and anti-intellectualism. Enemies of education. That's too disgusting for me. I stand with Jefferson and Franklin. Who do you stand with? Cartoon characters? Fascists?

I never claimed otherwise.



For the third time, the majority of voters might be ignorant, and the majority of leave voters might be ignorant, but 1,000 internet searches from unidentified persons (that's about 0.002% of the population) is lousy evidence for this.



I never even said any of that. I will agree that more educated voters are more informed in general, but not always. Since you bring it up I'd like to point out that I've met several university graduates in my life who know next to nothing about anything.