If this election’s primary season for the Republican nomination hasn’t presented enough evidence to show us the truth of this, then take a look at this article on io9. Turns out, democracies only work when large swathes of uninformed individuals side with a perceived majority. Well no kidding. What else would cause an endless cycle of individuals voting against their every interest, relieving themselves of any ounce of power they might have held, and placing it in the hands of sociopathic millionaires? The fallacy that we are taught, that democracies only work when people are informed, is proven false every 2 years in America yet we go on believing we can make a difference in those booths.
I’ve written before on my lack of faith in democracy, at least in the way our society implements it, but with this article and the primary season in full swing we can delve into it some more. We see a roster of Republicans that I honestly have trouble telling apart (aside from Ron Paul, but he’s terrible for far different reasons, amazingly) and the electorate is given a choice of voting for one of them, Obama, or third party. Our system is built around limiting an individual’s choices to within a narrowly defined set of acceptable terms, so third party votes are essentially the same as not voting. Even if a mass uprising thrust a third party candidate into a winning position, the system has checks and balances in place to prevent such a choice – the establishment will always win in this system. You can see this at work already with the mainstream media’s attempt to completely erase Ron Paul from reporting because he represents ideas that are outside the scope of acceptable debate.
In our democracy the choices we are given are not really choices at all but different views of the same opinion. So of course widespread ignorance is required if people are going to see these “choices” and still participate. And not just participate – but become so emotionally and personally involved like we see today! It no longer matters that both D and R have essentially the same goals.
The coming Romney Vs. Obama election will show the country yet again that our government can give us two options of the same flavor and call it a choice.
Could we say that the faux-democracy that is the US political/economic system requires ignorance, but that genuine democracy is impossible under conditions of deception and ignorance? I share your view that the electoral mechanism in the US gives us no genuine choice. The system is broken and needs to be replaced. I think it’s worth returning to the example set by emancipatory events like the Paris Commune which demonstrate what genuine democracy actually looks like. In that brief experiment in democratic living, the existing parliament and all of the career politicians were 100% swept aside, the standing army was dissolved, and capitalists were deprived of their power and ownership of the means of production. As Marx put it, “Instead of deciding once in three or six years which member of the ruling class was to misrepresent the people in Parliament, universal suffrage was to serve the people.” The people directly elected their own representatives who were instantly recallable and paid “workingmen’s wages”. The economy was democractized and brought under the control and management of working people themselves. As far as I’m concerned, that the sort of democratic society we should be aiming for. The occupy movement, with its GA’s and grassroots democracy from below, is the embryo of the kind of movement it would take to build a society like that.
Hi t! Thanks for your comment – excellent points!
You and I both agree that the U.S. electoral program is democratic in name only so let’s just set that aside – when we speak of democracy we mean true democracy.
I’m skeptical of democracy because of its tendency to fragment the electorate as you often see with the Left. We are a fragmented movement with that often fight against each other because there are so many voices going in so many directions that a united front always seems nearly impossible. That’s not to say that I wouldn’t want it to work, I desperately do. Given an opportunity to exist in a true democracy I would work tirelessly to see it work. I would expect however that a truly informed and educated electorate would soon divide as we see often with the Left.
I’d much rather see a lottery system whereby workers were allowed to represent their communities with having to win a pseudo popularity contest first. I guess, as I reflect on it, my stance on demarchy still involves and relies heavily on democracy. My grievance with democracy is mostly a grievance against electing people, not enacting policy.
Thanks again for your comment – it’s given me a lot to think about!