The 'Stupid Majority'

Whatever you want to talk about!
Post Reply
User avatar
Gregorovich
Underclass Hero
Posts: 3145
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:25 am
First name: Gregor
Age: 21
Gender:
n00b: Jake
Last.fm Username: grgrlove
Location: Leicester

The 'Stupid Majority'

Post by Gregorovich »

I saw a production of Henrik Ibsen's An Enemy of the People yesterday with no idea how it would turn out, having read no Ibsen before. I'm very grateful for going, for I finally found a piece of writing which criticises the biggest inherent flaw in democracy - that the majority are too ignorant and uninformed to have the same amount of power as the educated and experienced. The play follows one highly educated man (Dr. Stockmann) in his struggle against a town of socialist revolutionaries completely unaware of what is beneficial for the majority, falsely labelling his individualistic philosophy as elitism.

I especially admired the character of Captain Horster, who accepted that he himself was not informed enough to be allowed to have any political voice. I consider myself part of the 'stupid majority' - I do not plan to vote in my country's general elections until I know enough about the situation to make a careful, fully-informed judgement. And I do not consider it a civic duty to become politically informed in the first place.

Any thoughts on this, chaps? Does anybody know some other great literature which deals with the same premise?
fuck this signature nonsense
User avatar
Druska
Resident Skumfuk
Posts: 6231
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:32 pm
First name: Andrea
Age: 24
Gender:
n00b: xmarryxx Da_Aman
AKA: S, Lois Lane,Druska
PSN ID: Druska7
Instrument 1: Guitar
Last.fm Username: druska41
Twitter: _Druska_
Location: Catalonia, Europe, the Earth , Milky Way

Post by Druska »

Agreed, Democracy's biggest flaw is that each vote counts the same, yup you may call me fascits if you want, but i don't think that people who can barely spell their name right should be allowed to vote just because they're of age.
User avatar
X^2
Billy Spleen
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:13 pm
Age: 25
Gender:
Location: Finland

Re: The 'Stupid Majority'

Post by X^2 »

What I fail to understand is what is considered an uninformed or a bad vote? In a representative democracy the amount of information required to make a rational choice in elections is minimal. Also access to information has become very easy in the modern society which has reduced the role of traditional parties as a device/tool that makes it faster for one to cast a vote. I don't find it very likely that many would have huge struggles in finding their preferred candidate. Most such people tend not vote anyways. Neither do I understand the claim that majorities are too stupid. Most people in western societies have a rather high level of education, which I find the "best" criterion if voter rights were to be restricted. Anyhow, if you want to read stuff that supports your view, try Plato and Aristotle. Both shared a disgust for democracy. (Mainly the books Politics by Aristotle and the Republic by Plato)
User avatar
Gregorovich
Underclass Hero
Posts: 3145
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:25 am
First name: Gregor
Age: 21
Gender:
n00b: Jake
Last.fm Username: grgrlove
Location: Leicester

Re: The 'Stupid Majority'

Post by Gregorovich »

X^2 wrote:What I fail to understand is what is considered an uninformed or a bad vote? In a representative democracy the amount of information required to make a rational choice in elections is minimal. Also access to information has become very easy in the modern society which has reduced the role of traditional parties as a device/tool that makes it faster for one to cast a vote. I don't find it very likely that many would have huge struggles in finding their preferred candidate. Most such people tend not vote anyways. Neither do I understand the claim that majorities are too stupid. Most people in western societies have a rather high level of education, which I find the "best" criterion if voter rights were to be restricted.
Just look at America. For the last election they managed to supply two inadequate candidates, and almost half of the voting public (hence those who felt they were informed enough to vote) actually voted for who was clearly the far more inadequate of the two.

Britain is another example. Over here, the parties' views have crossed over so much on the political spectrum that it's near-impossible to definitively ascribe one as more right-wing or left-wing than the other. It has thus become the case that the British public are not voting for who best represents their own political interests, but who is most adequate to haul us out of this recession.
fuck this signature nonsense
User avatar
X^2
Billy Spleen
Posts: 272
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:13 pm
Age: 25
Gender:
Location: Finland

Re: The 'Stupid Majority'

Post by X^2 »

Just look at America. For the last election they managed to supply two inadequate candidates, and almost half of the voting public (hence those who felt they were informed enough to vote) actually voted for who was clearly the far more inadequate of the two.
This is exactly why I can't take this seriously; on what basis do you find the candidates inadequate? And why is the other one clearly far more inadequate? As far as I'm concerned there is no right or wrong in politics, just selections that lead to different outcomes.
Britain is another example. Over here, the parties' views have crossed over so much on the political spectrum that it's near-impossible to definitively ascribe one as more right-wing or left-wing than the other. It has thus become the case that the British public are not voting for who best represents their own political interests, but who is most adequate to haul us out of this recession.
The fact that left- and right-wing parties have became closer to each other is just a sign of the fact that class-society no longer is as major divider between people. More and more people belong to the to middle-class. Therefore the level of polarization and conflict between parties goes down and it comes harder to differentiate between parties.

Also voting for a party that supposedly can ameliorate the economic situation is definitely something I believe one should consider when voting. Also it shows quite a good level of understanding of economics/politics If one can truly consider such things.
User avatar
Gregorovich
Underclass Hero
Posts: 3145
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 11:25 am
First name: Gregor
Age: 21
Gender:
n00b: Jake
Last.fm Username: grgrlove
Location: Leicester

Re: The 'Stupid Majority'

Post by Gregorovich »

X^2 wrote:This is exactly why I can't take this seriously; on what basis do you find the candidates inadequate? And why is the other one clearly far more inadequate? As far as I'm concerned there is no right or wrong in politics, just selections that lead to different outcomes.
I find Obama inadequate primarily based on the four years of promised reform coinciding with the four years of negligible change, while I find Romney inadequate primarily based on the pig-headed, altruistic, materialistic belief that somehow putting the corporate classes first will solve anything at all. And I find both inadequate partially for condoning a system of government which has so much scope for corruption that only the seriously deluded would refer to it as anywhere near 'free', and which throws away billions of dollars of the tax-payer's money every year in the name of political advertising, in a deadly spiral of capitalist idiocy that a four-year-old could propose a solution to.
fuck this signature nonsense
Post Reply