Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

We Have Become Bad Voters. How We Can Change.
The Daily Signal ^ | November 3, 2014 | Arthur Milikh

Posted on 11/05/2014 7:26:09 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks

Elections have become theater.

By regularly promising the impossible, political candidates give the dangerous impression that salvation is only one bill, one policy solution away. It breeds impatience, impetuosity and ecstatic hopes in citizens.

And it can make us bad voters.

James Madison and Alexander Hamilton had a different understanding of voting than we currently do. The authors of The Federalist Papers understood voting as an exercise in elevating citizens’ minds above the concerns of their engrossing private lives. That is, voting was to be a kind of civic education, preceded by genuine debate, perhaps similar to the Lincoln-Douglas debates.

Such elections might be like the ones Winston Churchill observed during his youth. Common men “took as much interest in national affairs and were as good judges of form in public men, as is now that case about cricket or football,” he wrote. “The newspapers catered obediently for what was at once an educated and a popular taste.”

Today citizens appear far more often interested in and better informed about sports than politics.

Voting can elevate the mind by forcing us to make choices, and choosing can subordinate the passions to reason, if only for a moment. Ronald Reagan, among our greatest statesmen, understood that a people must come to a time for choosing.

But too often today we seem to be choosing between two candidates’ different overblown promises rather than making a deliberate choice between two positions.

For instance, our current process focuses little on the character of the representatives. According to the Federalist, they must be practical men of experience—not mere promisors or visionaries. In voting, our duty is “to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society.” That is, much regarding the fate of our nation depends on citizens’ ability to properly discern the qualities of character of the individuals they elect.

And what should representatives know? How to regulate domestic commerce; understand the diverse interests in the nation (ports, roads, etc.), and tax policy. (When’s the last time you saw a campaign slogan focusing on that knowledge?) They should not, as is current to think, sell citizens a dream about satisfying all desires and fantasies. Sensible, practical politicians can eventually become statesmen; visionaries, on the other hand, usually destroy much before disappointing themselves and voters.

Choice also deals with judging the condition of political freedom—how to properly extend or preserve it. And voting is the ultimate check on government power according to The Federalist Papers: the House of Representatives “should have an immediate dependence on, and an intimate sympathy with, the people.” If the government’s power will be restrained by dependence on the people, the public must understand its role in restraining that government, which has a natural propensity toward expanding its powers and influence.

But it’s not over after the election. The Federalist observes that citizens must “take the most effectual precautions for keeping [representatives] virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust.” That’s what elections do. They keep representatives virtuous. To do that, citizens must have the capacity to discern the extent to which their elected representatives in fact fulfill their duties. And not in terms of providing pork, but in creating sensible policy.

We are perhaps too in love with promises and have developed a taste for the impossible. Rather than elections making us rational and prudent, they have become a playground for the imagination. Do we want promisers or effective leaders?

Because if we want the latter, we should consider with more thought our decisions before marking our ballots.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: elections; lowinfovoters; voters; voting

1 posted on 11/05/2014 7:26:09 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

“judging the condition of political freedom”

Gee, I voted against the status quo under Obama. I never realized I was voting against political freedom. Next time I’ll wait on my betters to see how they want me to vote.


2 posted on 11/05/2014 7:33:53 PM PST by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
James Madison and Alexander Hamilton had a different understanding of voting than we currently do...

Times were very different, but perhaps in a way similar as well.

It is my understanding that Madison's House race loss was due to his opponent greasing the voters with alcoholic drinks (typical of the day for campaigns), whereas James did not.

3 posted on 11/05/2014 8:18:37 PM PST by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

This should’ve been published 6 years ago.


4 posted on 11/05/2014 8:21:15 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

you’re only bad if you vote for a liberal.


5 posted on 11/05/2014 8:22:48 PM PST by deweyfrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

I don’t believe he was talking about us. FReepers are generaly more politically astute than most of the rest of the population.


6 posted on 11/05/2014 8:31:33 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks (The mods stole my tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

It was meant across a broad audience. But go back a hundred years ago to H. L. Mencken, and he wrote on this topic almost monthly. It’s not a new topic.

Both parties utilize the news media to carry some message across, with lobbyists, journalists, ministers, and foundations actively part of the devices used. Perhaps thirty percent of the population can actively see through the ‘fog’ and vote with reason behind the vote.

Generally, a guy can apply a pretty simple template to see through the mess. Is this party putting more rules into the system to lessen commerce and thus limit jobs? Is this party rigging up the system to help some companies avoid taxation? Is this party floating some bogus change that has no affect or a negative effect on society?

Go back to the Roman Empire and the dissolving period near the end. The public lost respect of the leadership, and the Senate. It had all become opera and theater...just talk. Go view Sunday morning chatter shows, with Hollywood-style theater going on with DC political players. The public is losing respect.


7 posted on 11/05/2014 10:10:26 PM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks

IMO, voters no longer care about character. Only about who can best deliver on their Wish List.

Bubba Clinton surviving impeachment taught me that.


8 posted on 11/06/2014 8:22:49 AM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson