Friday, July 16, 2010
Trees.
Monday, July 12, 2010
Wrote a GP essay today.
A levels 2009 paper 1, question 2
‘Only educated people should have the right to vote in elections.’ What is your view?
Democracy is one of the most influential and pervasive form of governance in many First World societies today. The basis of democracy is by the people, for the people, the idea of majority rights. However, it has long been criticised. Democracy is seen to fail due to the irrational voter and the sheer lack of sufficient political education. Who should hold the votes then? There are those who say that the educated professionals have the greatest capacity to make the most pragmatic and informed decisions. However, the consequences are great should they be the only ones to hold the vote. It destroys the fundamentals of democracy; instead, it could well be oligarchy. It may cause a clear dichotomy between the bourgeois and proletariat and such fragmentation of society is damaging.
One of the common arguments put forth when justifying the move to allow the educated the only ones to hold the vote is the idea of the irrational voter. As put forth by American economist Milton Friedman, the idea is that the voter makes ill-informed choices that are normally driven by emotional or populist ideas. If we examine the two distinct education levels of society, the educated professionals are most definitely better equipped with the necessary tools to discern and rationalise. With education comes knowledge and with it comes awareness of issues. Educated individuals tend to have greater interest in politics as it appeals to their level of intellect. There is a higher propensity for an educated individual to sieve out what is pragmatic and best for the society as opposed to an uneducated individual who would probably go with populist measures. We can see this in African communities. One of the reasons for poverty in African communities is the lack of foresight; to a struggling person, short-term goals such as using aid money for farming mean much more than the potentially long-term benefits of education. Similarly, short-term populist policies that may appeal to the uneducated and many a times money is used as a carrot. As such, we can draw a lesson that circumstance and the lack of awareness may lead to decisions that might not be the best for society. However, as the educated few are smaller in a society, their votes are diluted. We can see this trend across nations with significantly more educated individuals as compared to those with lesser of such individuals. The governments of First World nations tend to fare better than those in the Third World be it economically or politically. On a superficial level, we can see that there is a close correlation between educated populations and how well a nation is doing. So, educated people should be the ones holding the votes because they are discerning and can decide for what is best for a nation.
However, this logic is flawed. Such a train of thought is an Orwellian utopia painted out in 1984. We increasingly see how long standing proponents of democracy face economic or political problems. Japan with her ever-changing leadership; the last one ending after nine months. The controversial Bush administration in handling foreign affairs; look at how many relationships turned sour over the course of five years in office. Ironically, these are countries close to the ideal democracy and with high education levels. What we need today is more then mere education, more than being teaching individuals skills for the workplace. We need to teach politics and discernment. We need to instil in populations the strong decisiveness of what is right from wrong. We have long preached about giving rights to individuals and that individuals should be free to exercise those rights. However, have we stopped to give individuals the necessary tools to exercise those rights effectively? Educated or not, the education received may well be irrelevant if what is taught does not address this aspect. Einstein once said that God does not play dice. Can you imagine how our physical world would be if things were merely random. We cannot afford to play dice with who governs us or generations preceding us will have a greater problem at hand. This is evident with the immense task ahead of the new Obama administration.
Perhaps the educated may choose the most effective government, however the consequences would be disastrous. What is the message sent to communities when the educated are the only ones voting? It essential strips the uneducated off the rights to decide from himself how he would be governed. It is effectively then, the educated ruling over the uneducated. May I also point out that the truth of the matter is that with higher education levels do we have greater earning power in today’s knowledge based economy. In other words, it may seem like hegemony of one social class over the other. We fragment a society and the consequence of that is worse as compared to a less than competent government. Governments may change to suit the people however; to reunite divided people is difficult. How long will it take before the highly educated rich South Koreans and the less educated poor North Koreans join hands once again? The fall of aristocracy in most societies has shown how clear divisions in society cannot thrive. Dividing the people may cause great social upheavals that could lead to wide spread violence. It would take immense amount of energy to quell such violence, especially so for a group of once free citizens. The loss of rights to vote is the loss of deciding what benefits and policies you can gain. It is like a parent losing control over her teenage child. It is beyond your ability to change the situation. Should we risk such a possibility just to allow the elite to lord over the rest and decide for what is the best? The Orwellian utopia is too great a risk to take. Let us learn from history not to commit such a mistake again.
Besides, if a democracy calls for the mandate of the people, then the elitist movement is against the very grain of modern democracy. The Greek democracy was to allow the elites to decide, however in our progressive society today, we cannot fall back on that system. In a nutshell, I have present to you how the idea that the educated can decide the best is essentially flawed. I have also shown you that the consequence of the implementation of an elitist system is a great cost on society.