Researchers Discover Cause of Voting

Researchers have discovered that people who are incompetent generally lack the knowledge that they are incompetent.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/01/18/MN73840.DTL

This lack of self-awareness is the glue that holds democracy together. As long as people feel capable of evaluating complex economic and geopolitical policies, they will keep voting. And as long as people vote, they will feel vested in the system and support it.

As regular readers know, voting is one of the few areas where I recognize my incompetence. That’s why I stay home on election day. In my case, voting would be irrational.

One of the ways I recognize my own political incompetence is by observing how my opinions keep changing. That shouldn’t be happening. For example, a month ago I would have said Obama was the best choice for president because he is an inspirational leader, less divisive than Clinton, and he would bring our troops home from Iraq sooner than McCain. Plus McCain is too old for the job. It all seemed so simple.

Then I read an article that explained how much Obama would tax the people in my bracket compared to McCain’s plan. Ouch. And I started thinking that over time, our all-volunteer army results in fighters who know they will end up in Iraq when they volunteer. That wasn’t the case when the war began, but it becomes that way if we stay indefinitely. Who am I to tell another citizen that he or she should not take that risk for some benefit to the country that he or she perceives?

The war is expensive, but at least McCain would take that money from the middle class majority, and being the majority, they are the ones who would need to elect McCain in the first place. Why would I want to deny the majority the option of voting to pay more taxes than they need to so that I can pay less? They should have that freedom.

If I believed that Obama would pull 100% of our troops out of Iraq, and that Al-Qaeda would surrender because of it, then McCain’s plan of perpetual occupation would look foolish. But as long as Al-Qaeda wants to kill me, no matter what my country does, I’m willing to let volunteers try to shoot them first, as long as other people are paying for the bullets.

The war is bad for Iraqi civilians, but no one knows for sure if they would be worse off without the occupation, given the likelihood of greater civil war. As important as that question is, you have to leave it out of the calculation because it is unknowable.

So I ask myself, isn’t the world better off if I just vote for McCain, buy stock in companies that profit from war, and let everyone else exercise their freedom of choice even if makes them poorer and/or dead?

See why I don’t vote?

Comments

[Bean]

If you do not vote, you support the majority. If you want to support the majority don't vote, if not then vote.

[Sanjay]

It won't matter who you or I vote for. It's not the president who makes the decisions or the laws. The president only signs. Even the pre-election speeches are written by others. I always look for signs of disbelief on the faces of presidential candidates when they make tall claims. You can read in their eyes, if you look closely, "who's going to do that, me?"

It's the staff who makes the decision and don't expect me to believe that the staff is selected on merit.

So how does it matter who is President. Scott is right. Don't vote.

[Andy Coulter]

normally i lean consevative but i hope hilary and barack and nancy and harry tax the shit out of your dumbass.

[ABTechie]

I love your blog!

And, I just bought Stick To Drawing Comics Monkey Brain!

Love it!

[Robert Wallace]

Scott,

Denying we have the capability to vote is denying that anyone can be self-interested. I suppose you can eliminate the whole free-will bit from the equation, but that would lead to the non-necessity of government in the first place since government is aimed at regulating people's exercise of free will. So assuming that the illusion of free will entitles us to look out for our own delusional interests, why not vote. You have no more free will than experts in any particular subject can muster, ergo, it would seem that you have just as much right/responsibility to vote your own personal interests (for whatever reason, accurate of fallacy) as the rest of the american public. Voting is supposed to be a selfish act, those who forget that will end up being molested by the government they put in power.

[oreo]

i think some of us are making it harder than it should be. A sure fire way to make sure your vote makes the difference we're so much trying to make, is to vote for the guy who's obviously going to win. That way not only did you do your civil duty, but you and the rest of the country should have no regrets, if the candidate-now-president, messes up. The other guy would have done worse, thats why he didnt win.

[Anarchy In Your Head]

Once again Scott, you seem to be coming dangerously close to grasping the philosophy of voluntaryism/anarchy.

[Patrick Hothersall]

I think you made a mistake. Al-Qaeda doesn't want to kill you. They want Jim Davis.

[Steve Anderson]

I'm always amazed when someone so bright and creative chooses not to participate in political society. If you think you're too dumb to make a choice, fine. But you're not. Just do what many of us -- unfortunately, not always the majority -- do and take the time to really learn about the candidates. Don't just believe the crap that gets on TV, don't be lazy about this. Read and think, then decide.

I'm voting for Obama, not because he is perfect or that I think he can, by himself, change the mess this country is in because of Bush and his enablers on both sides. This is not a perfect country or system, and it never will be. The best we can do, and what we owe our families and friends, is to do what we can to help make incremental improvements. The larger the election, and the presidency would be the biggest, the smaller the difference your individual vote will make, but that is no reason to simply give up.

[JT]

It's amazing to me that somebody who has accomplished so much in his life would say "fuck it" to anything. I get it that you are a pragmatist but your hand wringing and wishy-washiness regarding issues and voting is counterproductive. Perhaps you should just agree to disagree with yourself and save the mental mileage of your foolish uncertainty.

[kb]

My uncle once observed a Canadian election. Apparently theres an option for none of the above. If enough people choose it they have to cancel the election and find new candidates.

[TomH]

Perhaps you might feel differently if you had a Draft Age son.

[alias]

March 26, 2008 in --General Nonsense--

I agree with the category chosen.

[Mike]

The people who volunteer to get themselves killed are mostly people whose other option is a minimum wage life without benefits. You could show a little empathy towards them instead of trying to hide behind them pretending they are free to choose.

Besides, if you think that sending them to Iraq does on iota of good towards protecting you from AQ, you simply haven't been paying attention. Which is a shame.

In summary, I don't think we would be friends if I we knew each other. Not that you give a sh*t, because you seem to be very full of yourself.

[Boris]

Scott, I've meant to ask this in the past when you've discussed your reasons for not voting. I understand your stated reasons for not voting in national elections, or even state ones, but how about your local elections? Why don't you vote in those? I'm assuming, of course, that your "I don't vote" statement includes the local elections.

Your city government, Mayor, Alderman, School Board members, etc., probably have more direct impact on your daily life than your President or Congressman. Isn't it possible that you could understand local issues well enough to at least make a reasonable guess at the best candidates? Wouldn't you like to try it for one election at least?

Just asking. It's your town. Probably won't affect me unless I visit California.

[tord]

I can'y find which scotsman said it and precisely what they said but the quote goes along the lines of "democracy will last only as long as people do not realise they can get more out of it than they put in". Not voting means that the parties don't have to pander to you (most of whom I assume are average normal people) but instead parties start pandering to vocal minorities. Get out there and vote you dullards. Sure your vote may not make a crucial difference but it's far less supportive of those freedoms you appear to enjoy to ignore process all together.

If you really want to support the country you live in, volunteer for something that assists your community. Put something back into the community instead of taking all the time.

[Dylboz]

If DO vote, you can't complain. After all, you agreed to be governed by the outcome, you think that if 50% +1 person agrees, it becomes right and true and good right?. I mean, if your candidate or proposition won, you'd expect others to peacefully submit to it, right?

I reject the whole system, because Democracy is dictatorship, a "tyranny of the majority," just like De tocqueville said. Hitler was elected overwhelmingly, the Bolsheviks were ushered in by a popular revolution and Castro had the vast majority of Cuban's support. Chavez just barely lost his "President for Life" election. Democracy gives evil men the aura of legitimacy. Did you see what Cheney said when confronted with the popular rejection of his policies? He said "so?" Because the people get their say (between two Council on Foreign Relations, Skull and Bones, corporate tools) every 4 years, so if they vote for Bush, they vote in advance for everything he does, regardless of the fact that they cannot know what that will be, or how it will effect them or millions of innocent Iraqis or Iranians.

Democracy is not freedom, it's just a mob. Morality cannot be defined by a vote. No one has a right to rule over you, or threaten you with violence, no matter how many people they have on their side. Peace and freedom will only come with the end of the state, yet no one will vote for that, because people all want a cut of the loot, stolen from their neighbors by the government. The national motto for this sorry country should read "there oughta be a law," since that seems to be the reaction to every problem. Of course, people don't realize that means more cops, more guns (yes you liberals, if you want to legislate everything, it means you are asking for MORE guns, pointed at more people) and more jails.

So, hear hear, Mr. Adams. I wish everyone would stop voting, and then the Emperor could no longer claim he was clothed in anything but blood. Consent of the governed? Just try withdrawing that consent...

[Laure Chipman]

"As long as people feel capable of evaluating complex economic and geopolitical policies, they will keep voting."
should read:
"As long as people feel capable of evaluating complex economic and geopolitical policies, they will keep RUNNING FOR OFFICE."

[charlie]

Here's why I don't vote:
1)The purpose of voting is to get the person you want elected president
2)Whoever gets the most votes becomes president (with some electoral college shenanigans thrown in too of course). There's no "runner up" prize for being a close second.
3)Lots and lots of people vote
4)Because of 2 and 3, the odds are very low that my vote will have any effect on the election.
5)I don't have a really huge preference for own candidate over another
6)Therefore, the positive outcome of voting for me is a small positive (my candidate gets elected) times a very small chance, which is very close to 0. The negative outcome is that I waste half an hour or so. Therefore my overall expectation value is negative- basically I lose half an hour.

Although, all that aside, I ended up voting for Obama in the primary because I was trying to get one of his more fanatical supporters to go out with me.

[Ben]

About one American per week dies from the Iraq war IN AMERICA and did not volunteer.

No one wants to put a dollar value on life, but you can't ignore (what I call) the "life value of a dollar": money represents the toil of human labor. People sometimes die at work. Do the math:
GDP $13.3 trillion divided by ~5700 workplace deaths per year (I forget where I looked these figures up, but they're recent) = about $2.3 billion per corpse, which is close to what we're spending each week on the war.

[ammd]

Democracy is not about choosing a visionary leader

Democracy is about having a method of:
1> Preventing the thug at the top from staying there long enough to become so entrenched in his power that he can do anything he wants (i.e. 2 terms and then he's out)

2> Having a way of forcing the thug at the top to screw the general population in a way which they enjoy, instead of a way they dislike (else they'll vote him out)

3> Forcing the thug at the top to pretend to act (and even believe) in accordance with certain ethical standards which are acceptable to the general population, by appointing a another bunch of thugs (the opposition party) to whatch him and raise the alarm if and when he does not do so. (obviously the watchdog - thugs do this because they want to get into the top position, which they do from time to time, in which case the roles of top-thug and watchdog gets reversed)

AND ALL THIS HAPPENS WITHOUT TOO MUCH BLOODSHED - WOW!!!

I think it's an incredible system - it sounds a bit cynical when you break it into it's effective components (above), but it works like absolutely no other system has ever worked!

Of course, the most important role is played, not by the thug at the top, but by the watchdog-thugs.
I.e. - democracy can only work if there is a real possibility of the top-thug losing his position if he screws too many people in a way they don't enjoy

Therefore, the only responsible way to vote, is in such a way as to keep the balance of power as finely balanced as possible (in my view, one should always vote for the strongest political party that is not actually in power)

Posted by: Frans van Zyl

Best damned definition of democracy ever Frans. Thanks!

Not sure which thug I'm voting for yet, but you can bet I'll be out there.

[Dylboz]

If DO vote, you can't complain. After all, you agreed to be governed by the outcome, you think that if 50% +1 person agrees, it becomes right and true and good right?. I mean, if your candidate or proposition won, you'd expect others to peacefully submit to it, right?

I reject the whole system, because Democracy is dictatorship, a "tyranny of the majority," just like De tocqueville said. Hitler was elected overwhelmingly, the Bolsheviks were ushered in by a popular revolution and Castro had the vast majority of Cuban's support. Chavez just barely lost his "President for Life" election. Democracy gives evil men the aura of legitimacy. Did you see what Cheney said when confronted with the popular rejection of his policies? He said "so?" Because the people get their say (between two Council on Foreign Relations, Skull and Bones, corporate tools) every 4 years, so if they vote for Bush, they vote in advance for everything he does, regardless of the fact that they cannot know what that will be, or how it will effect them or millions of innocent Iraqis or Iranians.

Democracy is not freedom, it's just a mob. Morality cannot be defined by a vote. No one has a right to rule over you, or threaten you with violence, no matter how many people they have on their side. Peace and freedom will only come with the end of the state, yet no one will vote for that, because people all want a cut of the loot, stolen from their neighbors by the government. The national motto for this sorry country should read "there oughta be a law," since that seems to be the reaction to every problem. Of course, people don't realize that means more cops, more guns (yes you liberals, if you want to legislate everything, it means you are asking for MORE guns, pointed at more people) and more jails.

So, hear hear, Mr. Adams. I wish everyone would stop voting, and then the Emperor could no longer claim he was clothed in anything but blood. Consent of the governed? Just try withdrawing that consent...

[Aardwizz]

So let me get this straight:

You know that other people are irrational when they cast their ballot.

You also know that you, yourself are irrational, and therefore aren't QUALIFIED to offset other people's flavor of irrationality with your own brand? So that we get a true representative nincompoop, instead of one that leans one way or the other?

What am I missing here?

©¿©¬

[Blaze]

Everyone in America seems to focus on these national political issues with the belief that the next President of the United States of America, gets some sort of magic "do what he wants" wand. The fact is that it is the US Congress and a bunch quasi-governmental powers that make the decisions that affect us every day.

In fact, it is likely that if you live in the US your local school levy proposal will affect you more in your daily life than the US occupation/liberation (I am not picky or taking sides) of Iraq.

All POTUS can do is appoint a few candidates to various posts, pardon people and order the military about. But POTUS can do none of THOSE things with out congress' funding or approval. The vote, therefore, that matters most in national politics is the one for your state's congresspersons and senators. Just as the ones in your state's congress.

Furthermore the obligation to do MORE than vote is also present. Voting someone in or out of office is and should be a last resort. To encourage policies you like, and discourage ones you dislike, every citizen should be writing, emailing or calling their representatives.

And think what we could all do.

Want five weeks of paid vacation every year? Contact your congresspersons and let them know.

Want a balanced budget every year, with a plan to pay off the debt? Same.

Want the war in Iraq to endor to continue? Same

I know that our representatives do listen to us, almost all the time. But we have to be much noisier between elections than we are. And because, like us, they tend to act out of self-interest (but only as they see it) they will change their tunes to the voice of the people.

Democracy, it works if you work it. Keep coming back.

[John Coletti]

We are a republic, not a democracy. We are a nation governed by laws, not of men, or the masses, as would be a democracy.

Push for the FairTax. That'll resolve your concerns about taxes.