I agree. Many years ago William Buckley, the right wing editor of the right
wing National Review made a statement that I was surprised to find myself
agreeing to then, and even more so today. He said something like the
following, "I would sooner have the first 100 names from the Boston phone
book than the 100 elected US senators making decisions on my behalf" I have
met many Harold's, people of commonsense, and have met many high IQ types,
whizz-kids. Guess who I am going to look for for ideas during the next ice
storm, or y2k disaster-- or just plain ideas on governance.
arthur cordell
----------
From: Victor Milne
To: futurework
Subject: Re:democracy
Date: Saturday, January 30, 1999 11:27AM
As I recall, this thread got started with a comment about many of the voters
seeming to be neither intelligent nor well-informed. I'm sure from many of
his postings that Ed Weick did not mean this in an elitist sense.
I don't think lack of intelligence is really the problem. I also do not
think that intelligence in any easily definable sense is really relevant.
The core of the issue is really personal values. I work in a factory and my
best friend there is a spot-welder named Harold. I don't think Harold could
have pursued all the academic education I obtained before my foot slipped
off the career ladder. However, Harold's heart is in the right place and he
has a great deal of common sense (in the original meaning of that phrase,
not in the debased meaning popularized by the right-wing government of
Ontario).
When you promote the notion of governance based on intelligence, you have no
guiding values to select those people. Although I have successfully
completed 10 years of post-secondary education (English and later theology),
I doubt that I or anyone else could prove that I am more intelligent than,
say, a University of Chicago neoconservative economist. It just happens that
I am right about most things and he is dead wrong!!! I would much rather see
my friend Harold in charge of vital policy decisions than a neoconservative
economist. That is why I would never support a meritocracy scheme like Jay
Hanson's.
I think that most people have their values right, say about 70 per cent of
them. (I base this figure on poll results in Canada about specific issues
such as health care or welfare.) However, the voters often elect parties
that are all too likely to bring about results contrary to what they really
want. They get taken in by phoney promises, "We have to cut the deficit, we
have to give tax breaks to big business, so that we can afford to give you
better health care ... sometime in the sweet bye-and-bye."
The problem is one of misinformation for at 70 per cent of the voters. I do
not see any easy way to change the situation. Media outlets are very
expensive to own and operate, so by definition they will continue to be
owned by the wealthy and to promote the interests of the wealthy. Most
people are not going to search the Internet looking for fresh information
and alternative viewpoints; they don't have the time and the specific
interest. Stephen Best, Director of Environment Voters, believes that
activisits can influence the direction of the government only by working at
the grassroots level, doing personal canvassing during elections.
http://environmentvoters.org
I intimated that for perhaps 30 per cent of the voters, the problem is more
than lack of information; they don't have their hearts in the right place.
I've been doing some informal analysis of why some people enthusiastically
support the regressive Mike Harris regime in Ontario although a
well-informed person would see clearly that it is against their own economic
self-interest.
My observations convince me that for many people there is an emotional
component to their allegiance that is quite impervious to logic and
information. Some evince a masochistic guilt: "We were living too high off
the hog; someone had to make those cuts." A larger number like to blame
problems on the weak and helpless: "It's those lazy welfare bums that like
to sit at home and drink beer while I'm out working my ass off to pay for
them." Or it's the immigrants, people of colour, aboriginals, etc.
I do not think there is much hope of changing people like that. As the
French say, tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner. These people probably had
a lousy childhood with parents knocking them around for nothing, and they've
grown up to believe in knocking around the weak and helpless.
The only hope I see is to work one at a time on the 70 per cent who are
reasonably well-balanced to elect governments that promote the real
long-term interests of citizens, and as we gradually get a better society,
it will produce fewer people who are emotionally screwed up.
Live long and prosper
Victor Milne & Pat Gottlieb
FIGHT THE BASTARDS! An anti-neoconservative website
at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/pat-vic/
LONESOME ACRES RIDING STABLE
at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/
