Tweet
Because they are fucking stupid, that's why.
-
Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
StyleZeitgeist Magazine -
Democracy doesn't work. Two pieces of information I've read recently have really cemented this in my mind.
How prescient was Walter Lippmann? He who coined the words "Stereotype" and "Cold War" wrote this back in the 1920s in his book "Public Opinion" (Free on kindle on amazon)
"To his mind, democratic ideals had deteriorated, voters were largely ignorant about issues and policies, they lacked the competence to participate in public life and cared little for participating in the political process. In Public Opinion (1922), Lippmann noted that the stability the government achieved during the patronage era of the 19th century was threatened by modern realities. He wrote that a "governing class" must rise to face the new challenges.
The basic problem of democracy, he wrote, was the accuracy of news and protection of sources. He argued that distorted information was inherent in the human mind. People make up their minds before they define the facts, while the ideal would be to gather and analyze the facts before reaching conclusions. By seeing first, he argued, it is possible to sanitize polluted information. Lippmann argued that seeing through stereotypes (which he coined in this specific meaning) subjected us to partial truths. Lippmann called the notion of a public competent to direct public affairs a "false ideal." He compared the political savvy of an average man to a theater-goer walking into a play in the middle of the third act and leaving before the last curtain."
For me this is dead on. That he saw this coming in the 20s without seeing how the media has evolved or the deadlock bullshit we have in congress and the lack of responsibility/corrective behavior demonstrated by voters....
Honestly that voters can't see past "Aren't happy" -> "Democrat is President" -> Response = "Vote republican" is demoralizingly sad. The process is broken period, but that people don't see the problem is a partisan deadlocked congress in conflict with the executive branch which means NOTHING CAN BE DONE.... you don't respond to the situation by making the deadlock even worse.
That polls show that people hate congress and both parties, but then on voting day congress only changes for the worse... means unilaterally the process don't work and hoping for a solution from this process is akin to trying to win the lottery. It can't even express the will of the current public, let alone an informed and reasonable public.
Oh the other thing was this article http://www.politico.com/magazine/sto...ms-112467.html.
"If Gardner wins on Election Day, he certainly won’t be the only politician to get away with not being totally transparent, and it prompts the question: Why do voters fall for misinformation? A common refrain these days is that this is because there is a plethora of “low information” voters. If only those citizens knew more about politics, the argument goes, then the problem would be solved. But in fact, the problem is much more complex: It is often the people who are most interested and informed about politics that are most likely to adopt false beliefs. After all, there has been an explosion of “fact-checking” organizations out there, and they don’t seem to be breaking through. PolitiFact gave President Barack Obama’s “if you like your health plan, you can keep it” statement about the Affordable Care Act a “Pants on Fire” rating, but that hasn’t stopped liberals from defending his claim.
This is because human beings have a tendency to engage in what is called “motivated reasoning,” meaning the way they view evidence and come to make decisions is not to better understand “the truth” but, rather, to achieve self-serving goals. One goal could be the reduction of cognitive dissonance, or holding two incompatible opinions in one’s mind at the same time. Suppose you supported the Iraq War because of President George W. Bush’s argument that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. When those weapons were not found, you would be forced to reckon with two incompatible ideas: (1) The Iraq War was good policy based on an accurate assessment of the threat; (2) There were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. The dissonance has to be resolved somehow. You could change your position on the Iraq War, but the easiest thing to do is to just to believe that weapons of mass destruction were in fact discovered."
So really people aren't going to vote better and refine their understanding of the situation based on outcomes and consequences. They are if anything going to stick to their guns even more. Sweet. Prevalence of fact-checkering doesn't help, bad outcomes/consequences doesn't help...
Also look at India, the world's largest real democracy. Shit don't work.Comment
-
^^
Very interesting. Also, from the NYTimes:
When a force that powerful is fueled by anger rather than careful analysis, it produces results that can seem irrational. More than a third of people voting for a Republican House candidate said they were unhappy or even angry at the Republican leaders in Congress, according to exit polls, but they did so anyway, producing a House that is even more right-wing than the current one.
On a day of Republican triumph, a majority of voters said they wanted to find a way to allow immigrants to stay in this country, even if they are here illegally. That position could not be more at odds with the one held by most of the new senators elected yesterday.
Two-thirds of voters complained that the economy favors the wealthy. But they supported candidates who largely back further tax cuts for the wealthy, who oppose an increase in the minimum wage, who have blocked expanding Medicaid for poor people and who want to repeal a law that has provided health insurance to those who couldn’t afford it.
They did it in order to send a message of deep disappointment and frustration to President Obama, but the message didn’t really contain much content beyond that. “I’m just tired of all the fighting and bickering,” Jeffrey Kowalczuk, a Wisconsin voter, told The Times yesterday, explaining why he voted for Republicans.
One of the Republicans who probably won his support was Scott Walker, the Wisconsin governor who was re-elected yesterday after causing more fighting and bickering than most through his assault on public employees. And that kind of contradiction happened all over.
Half of the Colorado voters who think abortion should be legal in most cases helped elect Cory Gardner to the Senate, even though he supports a “personhood” bill that would have the effect of banning almost all abortions. A similar amendment on the Colorado ballot yesterday was defeated, but a third of those voting “no” still supported Mr. Gardner.
Most Georgia voters said the economy was the biggest issue on their mind, but they elected as senator David Perdue, who as a corporate chief laid off thousands of people and expressed pride in how many jobs he outsourced to other countries.
And of course the new Senate majority leader will be Mitch McConnell, elected by a state that is benefiting greatly from the new health insurance system that he has vowed to repeal.
None of those little details matter, we are told, because when the people are angry, they simply lash out. But the results brought to mind a completely unrelated survey that also came out yesterday. Almost everyone who uses a cellphone for texting said they know the extreme dangers of doing so while driving. But three-quarters of them do it anyway. Destructive and inexplicable behavior is not limited to politics.Comment
-
Since the subject of the average voter came up...
"Keep Mr. Saberi healthy — he knows too muchComment
-
“We have made enormous progress in race relations over the course of the past several decades... But what is also true is that there are still problems, and communities of color aren’t just making these problems up.” - President Obama
Comment
-
Oh! a politics thread.. Icarium your post is spot on in my opinion, and this is frankly something I've been working through a lot on my own lately, I'll have to read Lippman as he seems to be articulating a lot of the thoughts I have been having lately a lot more concisely than I have been able to. As someone who has spent most of my life thinking that political participation is a personal responsibility and Democracy is essentially the only viable and fair option for government, to suddenly be in a place of questioning that feels a little strange. It is also impossible to discuss with most people as almost everyone on both sides of the political spectrum would argue that Democracy is essential to a healthy nation, and the minute you question that to some people it's hard to have a rational conversation without them bringing ridiculous examples like North Korea into the equation.
Also to go along with what Jippos wrote in regards to people voting against their own best interest, this is something that will only become increasingly present in a two party, first past the post electoral system.. especially as the parties become more and more polarized. Not only does the moderate voter essentially lose their representation, there is also really no way for a person to efficiently vote for all of the issues that might be important to them. Whichever the most salient issue is will always earn their vote, and for most people it will be their personal economic situation. This is one of the key problems with Democracy and is essentially what Icarium was stating in his post.
For example, an individual could be pro-choice, pro-legalization, etc. but if the opposing candidate is promising improved health facilities and lower property tax.. Which issue is more salient to most people? Who knows if their single local congressman can make any headway on legalizing marijuana or whatever other cause they might care about, but he CAN lower property tax, and that is something that will be an immediate net gain for them.
Just realized I'm starting to ramble so I'll end it here..Comment
-
I wonder what kind of tragedy it will to take convince these republican rednecks that we need gun laws that match those of civilized countries.Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
StyleZeitgeist MagazineComment
-
Absolutely mind blowing to me that this kind of thing can happen at the rate that it has been occurring at in the past few years. Nonsensical that this is STILL a debated issue, can't even go to school, church or watch a fucking movie without having to worry. Two shootings in one day...I shudder to think of where we are headed with the advent of technology and ease of black market accessOriginally posted by Faust View PostOriginally posted by FaustComment
-
The Democratic debate was on last night. As expected, Hilary made a fool of herself while playing around with America. Her supporters continue to blindly follow her and so will the pseudoliberal media no matter how incompetent she is. Bernie gave a great performance tackling important issues ruining America, but will most likely lose the election because of our greedy government and ignorant citizens. Fuck America and its people.Comment
-
I have this dilemma, En. - do I vote in the Democratic primary with my mind or with my heart?
If I vote with my mind it will be Clinton because she stands a better chance of winning against the Republican nominee. If I vote with my heart - obviously it will be The Bern. Now, this is serious and it's hard to decide though I am leaning towards giving my heart a chance.Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
StyleZeitgeist MagazineComment
-
Your heart. Bernie is too great to not take the chance of supporting him no matter the chances against him. He's the only politician I can think of that genuinely cares about changing and improving America since JFK. Hilary is just another sinister politician plus her foolishness regarding Benghazi and on information in the email scandal. There's also her husband being partially responsible for the financial crisis several years ago as a long-term effect for repealing the Glass-Steagall Act, giving banks even more control in this country.Originally posted by Faust View PostComment
-
There's a really good gun reform commercial of a whacko shooting up his work place with a musket, then taking however long to reload it with the tag line: Guns have changed. Shouldn't our gun laws?
Current laments.Life is a hiiighwayComment
-
Meanwhile, we to your north have our election tomorrow. This is the (mass) e-mail I received from Ben, the teenaged son of our Conservative Party leader running for re-election.
Hi xxxx,
I voted for the first time in this election. And I’m excited that my first ballot will count for my dad.
But it’s not just because he’s my dad -- it’s that I believe in him.
I’ve watched him work so incredibly hard to do what’s best for our country.
Whether it was dealing with the recession in ’08, or being up there representing Canada on the world stage, he’s always worked with that one goal in mind.
I’ve had a front-row seat to seeing what this job takes -- and I know he’s the only one with the leadership Canada needs.
Monday’s result will be really close, and every vote matters. Why not sign up for a reminder?
Cheers,
Ben
So this is what it's come to.
Oh wait no, this is.Comment
-
Obviously. But, you don't just choose a President, you choose a party. And I'd rather see a Democrat President, however shitty, than a Republican.Originally posted by En. View PostFashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde
StyleZeitgeist MagazineComment
-
funnily enough, i grew up around ben during my time in ottawa. always knew him to be as rather smarmy and prickish in much the same way his father is.Originally posted by deadboy View Post
it'll be more than good to see harper out, which, if it doesn't will be even worse than the uk election result past
Comment
Comment