Hi there my fellow creatures of the night!
First of all I would like to apologize for my short hiatus. I am very sorry, but I have bee busy with work and school. As it turns out I have already started writing my second book, my first one is now being read by an editor (I hope he's not too disappointed), I've been watching a lot of football (expect an article on this season anytime soon), and hell... it was halloween, the best time of the year.
But hey, now that I'm done apologizing I'll head on to the topic at hand.
Given that the US has elected a new president and people believe the election was won by a landslide I am writing an article not only to refute this believe, but to comment on the US electoral system and the power of vote in general.
First of all I would like to apologize for my short hiatus. I am very sorry, but I have bee busy with work and school. As it turns out I have already started writing my second book, my first one is now being read by an editor (I hope he's not too disappointed), I've been watching a lot of football (expect an article on this season anytime soon), and hell... it was halloween, the best time of the year.
But hey, now that I'm done apologizing I'll head on to the topic at hand.
Given that the US has elected a new president and people believe the election was won by a landslide I am writing an article not only to refute this believe, but to comment on the US electoral system and the power of vote in general.
But before I start, consider this. Even though Obama won by a "landslide" (something like 350 to 170 votes) in reality he only won by 7 million popular votes... That's nothing! 7 million votes in a country of 300 million? It's only 2%... nothing!
Now, onto the article.
Now, onto the article.
Considering the whole issue surrounding the controversy of electoral vs. popular votes I will try and explain two very important political questions that have yet to be resolved in the modern world that directly affect us.
There was once a great greek philosopher who went by the name of Plato (there are actually some people who haven't heard of him) who wrote about a very intersting concept that surrounds political philosophy. Nowadays everyone speaks about democracy, about popular vote and about the people making the country's desicions. We have been raised to think that this concept and format is the perfect one, and those who think otherwise fall under the category of dictators, despots, kings, oligarchists, etc. We have been raised to believe that only those governments which cater the desicions made by the public are free, and those that do not, only believe in opression and no governmental freedom.
But I ask you. Who says that the people are capable of making desicions? Who says that people have the moral and political abilities to decide who will be THE best leader and who will benefit the country the most? After all, people are generally stupid, illiterat, ignorant and vote on basis of appearance rather that after a thorough assessment of the candidate at hand as well as the pros and cons of voting for or against him. So, ask yourself again, are people really qualified to elect their leaders?
Plato created a philosophical concept that directly adresses this question: The Ship of Fools. With the ship of fools Plato makes a very direct question in regards to this issue. The ship of fools describes a vessel being directed by non-sailors. The ship has no captain or navigator, and it inevitably crashes into the rocks...
The same thing happens with the elections. If no one knows about politics and knows how to elect a leader, the country will crash unto the rocks. Why? Because we have non-sailors driving the country. People who are not qualified to make political desicions should not be able to vote because their vote is just as valuable as that of a trained politician or cultured person (who will most likely take the desicion that helps the country the most). The presidential election affects everyone, and being that it is such an important desicion, only those which have the most knowledge on the subject should be able to make the desicions.
So in summary, normal people should not be able to vote because they don't have the necessary intelligence or knowledge to make the desicion that is best for the country. Letting untrained people vote is to give a monkey the power to kill its owner, it is as if a group of non-sailors try to navigate a ship. What happens? It will eventually crash into the rocks.
Now, how does this apply to the US electoral system?
The US electoral system was founded upon the belief that people are stupid and can't make the right desicions, which is why only electoral votes count. Originally, people would vote just to give the real voters an idea of who they wanted as president. Then, based on the popular vote, the politicians would vote for whom they chose, (they could vote for whom the people chose or for a candidate of their choice), as they were the ones who really knew what the country needed the most.
Of course, the electoral system has morphed into a monster of a system. Nowadays, neither the popular vote nor the electoral votes count. What we now have is something very strange. An irrational system that doesn't work because it follows neither one of these philosophies. The US electoral system works in the following manner: Each state is given a certain number of electoral votes depending on their population. People vote, and whoever candidate wins the designated state gets each and every one of the electoral votes, no matter if he one by 1% or by 100%. So a candidate could get all 55 votes from California when in reality only 50% voted for him, meaning that there are 27 electoral votes he shouldn't have. He could win the election and lose the popular vote...
So in summary, the US electoral system works only if applied as it was originally conceived. If not, what we have is a flawed system that doesn't work for the people or against it... it just doesn't work... and the worse part of it is that people don't understand it...
So to sum things up: DON'T LET PEOPLE VOTE... PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY NEED! Letting people vote means giving people power they don't know how to use. People don't know what is best for their country, and their vote affects everyone. The only people that should vote are those that are educated enough to vote. If not, stupid desicions and stupid people get the power. Examples?
Presidents like Vicente Fox get elected, and countries like Mexico suffer greatly as a consequence. People shouldn't vote. People are ignorant and stupid, and only those with sufficient knowledge about politics should be able to vote, as they are the only ones who make real desicions.
That is all,
Happy Hunting,
The WikiVampire
There was once a great greek philosopher who went by the name of Plato (there are actually some people who haven't heard of him) who wrote about a very intersting concept that surrounds political philosophy. Nowadays everyone speaks about democracy, about popular vote and about the people making the country's desicions. We have been raised to think that this concept and format is the perfect one, and those who think otherwise fall under the category of dictators, despots, kings, oligarchists, etc. We have been raised to believe that only those governments which cater the desicions made by the public are free, and those that do not, only believe in opression and no governmental freedom.
But I ask you. Who says that the people are capable of making desicions? Who says that people have the moral and political abilities to decide who will be THE best leader and who will benefit the country the most? After all, people are generally stupid, illiterat, ignorant and vote on basis of appearance rather that after a thorough assessment of the candidate at hand as well as the pros and cons of voting for or against him. So, ask yourself again, are people really qualified to elect their leaders?
Plato created a philosophical concept that directly adresses this question: The Ship of Fools. With the ship of fools Plato makes a very direct question in regards to this issue. The ship of fools describes a vessel being directed by non-sailors. The ship has no captain or navigator, and it inevitably crashes into the rocks...
The same thing happens with the elections. If no one knows about politics and knows how to elect a leader, the country will crash unto the rocks. Why? Because we have non-sailors driving the country. People who are not qualified to make political desicions should not be able to vote because their vote is just as valuable as that of a trained politician or cultured person (who will most likely take the desicion that helps the country the most). The presidential election affects everyone, and being that it is such an important desicion, only those which have the most knowledge on the subject should be able to make the desicions.
So in summary, normal people should not be able to vote because they don't have the necessary intelligence or knowledge to make the desicion that is best for the country. Letting untrained people vote is to give a monkey the power to kill its owner, it is as if a group of non-sailors try to navigate a ship. What happens? It will eventually crash into the rocks.
Now, how does this apply to the US electoral system?
The US electoral system was founded upon the belief that people are stupid and can't make the right desicions, which is why only electoral votes count. Originally, people would vote just to give the real voters an idea of who they wanted as president. Then, based on the popular vote, the politicians would vote for whom they chose, (they could vote for whom the people chose or for a candidate of their choice), as they were the ones who really knew what the country needed the most.
Of course, the electoral system has morphed into a monster of a system. Nowadays, neither the popular vote nor the electoral votes count. What we now have is something very strange. An irrational system that doesn't work because it follows neither one of these philosophies. The US electoral system works in the following manner: Each state is given a certain number of electoral votes depending on their population. People vote, and whoever candidate wins the designated state gets each and every one of the electoral votes, no matter if he one by 1% or by 100%. So a candidate could get all 55 votes from California when in reality only 50% voted for him, meaning that there are 27 electoral votes he shouldn't have. He could win the election and lose the popular vote...
So in summary, the US electoral system works only if applied as it was originally conceived. If not, what we have is a flawed system that doesn't work for the people or against it... it just doesn't work... and the worse part of it is that people don't understand it...
So to sum things up: DON'T LET PEOPLE VOTE... PEOPLE ARE STUPID AND DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY NEED! Letting people vote means giving people power they don't know how to use. People don't know what is best for their country, and their vote affects everyone. The only people that should vote are those that are educated enough to vote. If not, stupid desicions and stupid people get the power. Examples?
Presidents like Vicente Fox get elected, and countries like Mexico suffer greatly as a consequence. People shouldn't vote. People are ignorant and stupid, and only those with sufficient knowledge about politics should be able to vote, as they are the only ones who make real desicions.
That is all,
Happy Hunting,
The WikiVampire
No comments:
Post a Comment