Since the debate seems to overwhelmingly side with those that feel that the government should not be protecting us from our own stupidity, I have a question. Why do we stand for it? Is our opinion the minority opinion in the real world? (I think it is safe to assume that the population of the Straight Dope message boards has a higher percentage of intellectuals than you would find at your average monster truck rally–no offense to you truckers out there). Is laziness the only real reason that we let lawmakers do this to us (i.e. I mean that we are too lazy to complain to the lawmakers, though we do plenty of complaining on the boards)? Or is the average American so stupid that they believe that such regulation of behavior actually benefits them (this has always been my theory)?
I hope you have some explanations because my theory that most people are stupid is incredibly disheartening. I rarley bother to advocate for political change because, when I do, so few people are willing to agree with me even when they cannot come up with a single reason why their opinion is correct (doesn’t happen very often on these message boards but happens a lot more than it should in other places). If they had any reason for believing what they believe (other than saying that it has always been that way) I wouldn’t be so disturbed, but if they have no reason for believing what they believe then they clearly haven’t thought about it and thus should have no opinion rather than a strong opinion. Strong opinions should be based on reasons that you have come up with (or heard someone else mention). Strong opinions should not be based on the fact that you have heard that there are good reasons for believing something, but you have no idea what they are. So few people are well educated on most topics that the average person should have no opinion and the decisions should be made by those that care enough about a topic to research it (or at least think about it for a while). Most people do not vote, but most of those that do vote are not qualified, in my opinion. The stupidity that comes out of their mouths is incredible. They eat the spin they are given spoonfuls at a time and are shocked when they discover the truth. People should know to expect the truth only in the most broad sense when they listen to politicians speak, yet the debates actually influence votes to a significant degree.
I suppose a great example of voter stupidity would have to be third parties. I cannot tell you how many people have said that they will not vote third party because they feel that it is throwing away their vote. God, the stupidity. For starters, each individual vote is almost worthless. Throwing away something that is almost worthless really is not that big of a deal. I know people say, “Look at Florida. See. Every vote counts.” Unless your vote is worth 500 of mine, every vote does not count. Florida was close, but not close enough for your individual vote to matter. If your decision about whom to vote for influences hundreds of other people, then your vote counts, otherwise it does not. Your vote has the same value no matter whom you cast it for (except perhaps Mickey Mouse, who gets hundreds of votes each election year). People essentially front run. They want to say that they voted for the winner so they vote for one of the top two candidates. Since your vote does not matter, there is no reason to spend it on such a stupid ideal. It is much better to vote for what you believe in than to vote so you can win. Especially since things may actually change for the better if everyone starts voting their ideals and your ideals are part of the majority opinion. I would doubt that the average voter could even name more than 2 third parties, much less say what they stand for. If you do not know what the third parties stand for, how do you know they do not represent your opinion? A very large number of voters are not pleased with either the democrats or republicans yet they do not even make an attempt to see if there is someone that better represents them. They either pick the lesser of two evils (e.g. the choice between airline food and hospital food) or they do not vote. Neither choice is intelligent, but the latter is less unwise. At the very least, they could vote for the least of 10 evils (or however many parties are listed on their ballot). I am not asking people to perform complicated research, merely know what each party listed on their ballot stands for. Ideally you would even know about the parties that did not make it to the ballot in your state, but you should at least know what the big third parties are about. If that is too much to ask, then don’t vote. As it is now, the few that do their homework (and are thus prepared to vote) are completely overshadowed by the masses of ignorant voters that think that all those other names on the ballot that are not democrats and republicans are just there to confuse them.
If you honestly agree more with the Democrats or Republicans more than any other party then go ahead and vote for them, but you owe it to yourself (and everyone else) to find out if this is the case. I have never understood how these two parties became so popular. On the one hand, you have the Democrats that believe that the federal government’s place is in your wallet, but not in your private life. On the other hand you have the Republicans that believe that the federal government’s place is not in your wallet (that is the job of state governments), but in your private life. I would think that the two parties would be one that thinks that the government should leave you be for the most part (Libertarians) and one that thinks that the government should regulate everything that you do (though I can see how this would be unpopular). Oh well, perhaps one of you can show me the errors in my thoughts so I can live a happy life as a member of the ignorant mass.