The democratic process was originally conceived to entrust a group of wise and principled people who use their intelligence, reason, and perspective in order to make proper decisions for the greater populace. To this end and to ensure those principled people were the ones making the decisions, there were various types of qualifications for who could be among the voting population. Among these qualifications (which varied across time and place) were sex, property or wealth requirements, age limits, citizenship status or military service, race, literacy or competence.
As time passed, in various regions various groups who were not part of the voters wanted to have the vote. In order to grant the vote to more people, standards for who could vote needed to be changed. Some of the standards were superficial such as race or sex; some of the standards were substantive such as property, and literacy or competence. The more people that were to be included, the more the standards had to be changed.
To have refinement replaced with the base is a regression. To have the average of a group be lowered by din of numbers of the base is a dilution effect. It is a new population overall. If a group of people reasoned and found a plan of action was incorrect, the color of their skin or their gender does not matter; if a group of people not as capable of reasoning used their feelings to direct their choices, then their literacy or competence levels did matter. If people push a plan to have everyone voluntarily contribute to a cause, then property ownership does not matter; if a group without property wants to fund a program and decides that those with property can have it seized to fund it, then property ownership does matter.
Where it took perspective, argument, and reason to sway the minds of some voters who had attained a standard, it takes less to sway the masses who may or may not understand the complexity, nuance, and consequences of various moral, legal, and economic issues. Their numbers are not close to being equal. But, they all get to vote nonetheless with each vote carrying the same weight.
With the masses to be convinced, the candidates themselves are changed. High-minded reason gets replaced with presence and promises. The realities of the promises are irrelevant; the voter only needs to believe in them long enough to vote as then the winner is in power and broken promises are forgotten.
What is even worse than ignorance in the voting block is malevolence. The malevolent do not see themselves as such, but as righteous. It takes a critical review to see which side has the moral position and reasoned stance. But that is the very thing many cannot or will not do in order to justify their position and the programs they want to inflict upon others. The worst are those who knowingly want to inflict their righteous malevolence, understanding the consequences, as they want to change the system everyone else is part. These people do not come from a position of ignorance but with the full intention of using the system that they will by din of numbers eventually take over, replace, and deny others the chance of using the system to remove them.
Democracy is only practical when it involves those who know what they are talking about and understanding consequences and trade-offs. Democracy is only moral when it involves voluntary participation and is not forcing someone else to lose their rights. Immorality does not become moral because a larger group has a preference.
However, in the regression from the dilution those who do not understand or accept the practical or moral issues involved want more of their number heard and to have sway over those who do understand. They are the ones who are the minority who must suffer the consequences to sate the whim-of-the-moment’s mob.
No comments:
Post a Comment