Thomas Jefferson is quoted as saying, “Men in their makeup are naturally divided into two camps, those who fear and distrust the people and wish to draw all power from them into the hands of higher classes, and those who identify themselves with the people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them the safest and most honest, if although not the most wise, depository of public intent.” He then went on to ask, “Who will govern the governors?” And his answer was “There is only one force in the nation that can be depended upon to keep the government pure and the governors honest, and that is the people themselves. They alone, if well informed, can prevent the corruption of power, and restore the nation to its rightful course if it should go astray. They alone are the safest depository of the ultimate power of government.”
As Jefferson predicted, there are those who argue against direct and participatory democracy. They argue that the average American is not capable of self-government. They lack the education to make informed judgements and determine their own self-interest, and they are easily manipulated by their passions and prejudices. They call direct democracy “election anarchy,” “lousy lawmaking,” “democracy’s barrier to racial equality,” and “the right of the American people to make fools of themselves.” They point out some of the most wrong-headed propositions passed through the initiative process as proof of the folly of allowing the American people to make decisions for themselves, but how can you argue that the American people are not capable of making decisions for themselves, yet they are capable of choosing their own representative that will make decisions for them? How are examples of laws passed through the initiative and referendum process any more repugnant than similarly repugnant example of laws passed by our legislatures? They are not, and, basically, it is an argument that focuses on the wrong criteria. The question should be, Is the average American voter capable of making an informed and reasoned decision about propositions that are presented to them through the initiative, referendum and recall process that not only serves their own individual interests but also serves the common good?
The notion that the American people are not informed enough to make policy decisions is not supported by the data. Voters are risk adverse, and if presented with a proposition that they do not fully understand, or have doubts about, or some confusion over the proposition, they are likely to settle on the stability of the status quo and vote against the proposition. On the other hand, if they sufficiently understand the proposition based on information available, they will evaluate the cost/gain to them, and they will vote, yes, even if the proposition involves some risk but serves their interest, ideology, or simply what they believe to be right or wrong or better for the country.
The study by Shaun Bowler and Todd Donovan, Demanding Choices, observes that the voter will make these decisions based on information available through (1) peer groups, (2) relatives, (3) their own experience, (4) information available through the media, debates, special interest groups, leaders, and organizations that the voter identifies with and trust, (5) pamphlets mailed by the government to every registered voter that in most cases include a copy of the proposition, the arguments in favor and against the proposition written by the major supporters and major opponent of the proposition, and a list of key individuals and organizations that support or oppose the proposition. (Bowler)
The pamphlets issued by most of the cities and states are of particular importance as a source of information because they are issued to all the registered voters, and they are exceedingly popular with the voters as a source of information. The extent of the use of the pamphlet as a source of information was the subject of a study at the University of California at Davis by Dubois, Feeney, and Constantine. The study revealed that only 20% of the respondents claimed to have read the actual text of the proposition being voted on, yet, more that 90% of the respondents claimed to have looked at the arguments in favor and against the proposition in the pamphlet, and more than 80% claimed that the names of the organizations and individuals listed in the pamphlet who were for or against the proposition was important to them in making a decision on how to vote. (Dubois, Philip 58-59). The study also observed that the ballot pamphlet was the most frequent source of information cited by the least educated voters, and even with limited information, processing, and reading skills this segment of the population was quite capable of coming to a reasoned decision that clearly reflected an understanding of the proposition, and its impact on them.
If then, based on this studies and others, we accept the conclusion of years of research that the average American voter, is quite capable of being sufficiently informed and that they are quite capable of understanding the impact of the proposition on their own interests, the next question becomes, Is the average American voter easily manipulated by their passions, prejudices, and narrow self-interest, and, therefore, they are not capable of the far sighted, broad mindedness, deliberative decision making and judgement of their betters?
This claim that the average American voter is not capable of going beyond their own prejudices and narrow self-interest is blatantly false, and it is also narrow-minded and biased in its indifference to the plight of the average working American. In fact, it is often demonstrated that the body politic is less disconnected than the elite classes. In fact, it can be argued that academics in their studies put too much emphasis on what distinguishes them, education and so-called objectivity where, in fact, the intelligence of the elite classes is often used to find infinite ways to rationalize the irrational, and what they call objectivity is a way to distance themselves from the pain they cause, whereas the average American is on the leading edge of the consequences of bad law. They are the nerve ends of the body politics, and they know that something is not working because it hurts.
In addition, the average American voter has also proven repeatedly that they can transcend their own pain and empathize with the pain of others and understand the boarder implications of their responsibilities as citizens. This is revealed in the study of tax propositions. If your average American voter was as narrow minded in their self-interest as their critics would lead us to believe, we would expect the average American voter to vote again propositions that would raise taxes and vote for propositions that would lower taxes regardless of the broader consequences of their vote, but that is not the case. In a study by Bill Piper sponsored by the Initiative and Referendum Institute entitled, “A Brief Analysis of Vote Behavior Regarding Tax Initiative From 1928 to March 2000, it was observed in the study that, based on analysis of the history of tax initiatives, the evidence confirms that voters are quite restrained in making decisions about taxation. The record shows that most anti-tax initiatives fail and that the voters do approve tax increases when they feel that the tax increase is necessary. For example, between 1978 and March2000 there were 131 tax initiatives and only 51 passed, a number that represents 39% of the tax initiatives voted on by the voters in this period. Of the initiative that were passed, there was only a 10% difference in approval between anti-tax initiatives and pro-tax initiative. (Piper 4) To further demonstrate the reasonableness of the voters it should be noted that the most popular form of tax revolt was to index taxes to inflation so that a taxpayer’s tax burden would not increase even though real income had not increase. One of the prime example of taxes and the average American’s ability to see beyond themselves is the fact that older citizens voters without children attending schools are not more likely to oppose school tax referendums (Bowler pg. 95), and this is true of other forms of initiatives and referendums where the average citizen will define his or her own economic interests in terms of the common good and vote for propositions that express empathy, social responsibility, and just good common sense.
No, the American people are not the problem. The problem is the vampire class who can’t see their own image in the mirror. They see the idealized image of themselves created by the media and story tellers in their pay who project on them an image of being far sighted, broadminded, deliberate, and fair. Emotionally, they are projected as civil, considerate, and tolerant. On the other hand, in the mirror in which they can’t see their own image, they project their real nature and character onto us. With blood on their lips, they see us as vulgar, rude, and uncivilized. They are responsible for the death of millions, and they consider us as impulsive, irrational, and prone to aggressive outbursts. They see us as the mob incapable of self-rule, yet, in fact, the real mob is in Washington, on Wall Street, and in the boardrooms of corporate America. It is interesting that the prejudices that they project on the majorityof the American people is quite like those depicting women and racial and ethnic minorities as being childish, irrational, ignorant, irresponsible etc. They do this so that they don’t have to face the truth of who they really are in all their ugliness, and they do it to protect themselves from you and me, because if we did see them for who they really are, we would probably become that mob that they fear and tear them apart.
We’re the Solution, Not the Problem
No, the American people are not the problem. We are the solution, and a true political and economic democracy is the mirror and the lamp that will enlighten us and enable us to see the true image of who they are and who we are, and it will be a much different picture. Therefore, we demand the initiative, referendum, and recall process of direct and participatory democracy be incorporated into the American political system at all levels of government. We also demand a constitutional amendment that will enable the American people to directly amend the Constitution of the United States. However, this is only half the story. We can’t have a true democracy when we spend most of our waking hours working in a totalitarian state called the job working for the Boss. Therefore, in part two of the new American revolution we will focus on economic democracy and an economy by, for, and of the people.
Cites:
1. Bowler, Shaun, Todd Donovan, Participatory Politics for a New Age, University of California Press, Los Angeles 1984
2. Dubois, Philip, Floyd Fenney, and Edmund Constantine, The California Ballot Pamphlet: A Survey of Voters: Report Prepared for the Office of the Secretary of State of California March 1991
3. Piper, Bill, “A Brief Analysis of Vote Behavior Regarding Tax Initiatives From 1928 to March 2000, a study supported by the Initiative and Referendum Institute, Citizen Lawmaker Press, Washington, DC
Illustrations:
1. Illustration #16, Power to the People, Marcello Tino and Andrea Dalla Bona, Learn or Die: The New American Revolution, Thompson and Prince, 2020
Author's Note - Learn or Die: The New American Revolution is a two part revolution of political and economic democracy. Initially in the excerpts from the book that I am sharing, I am focusing on the political revolution and citizen lawmaking. In this study of political democracy, I will cover key questions about the initiative, referendum, and recall process of citizen lawmaking: 1) Does money dominate the process? (2) Does the initiative, referendum, and recall process of lawmaking trample minority rights? (3) Does the process work for everyone? (4) Is the average American capable of being a citizen lawmaker?
Author's Note - I have made Learn or Die: The New American Revolution available to you through Smashwords in a Freedom for Free Edition where you can pay what you want for the book or nothing at all. It is free. I'm doing this because after 50 years of research and study I believe I have found the way for all of us.
Comentarios