The point (relative to the OP) is that it is appropriate for Legislators to mine votes from the uneducated half of the bell curve, but the elected legislators’ Constitutional duty is to govern, not to represent the views of the drooling knuckle dragger class.
I don’t quite understand, are you implying that appealing to voters without college degrees is incompatible with the oath of office?
ETA: And therefore appealing to constituents is not a good thing for democracy?
~Max
Perhaps so - when the political message becomes a product tailored to appeal to the mores of an uneducated class. When the message no longer promotes the general welfare it is incompatible with the oath of office.
In a case where appealing to a majority of the electorate means going against the Constitution, then continuing democracy - and here I mean democracy, not republic - democracy in that specific situation is itself unconstitutional.
I don’t think I have contradicted myself here. In such a case where the uneducated constitute a majority and want to do away with the Constitution, it would be good for democracy, and bad for the Constitution, to appeal to the uneducated.
~Max
Our oath of office refers to a well established Constitution and tradition of governance, not to a class in the theory of ‘Democracy’.
The situation identified by the OP is that of a political party cultivating an uneducated population of voters in order to stay in power.
The method of electing a legislator in this country is direct democracy. So again, I don’t really understand what you are getting at.
If the uneducated are the majority, appealing to them is the democratic thing to do.
~Max
No, we have a Constitution and system of laws. Mob rule is not the goal.
The OP identifies a troubling trend in our system. A political party has identified an unsuitable market and is catering to it. The market is unsuitable because it’s desires are not in the best interest of the US. They do not promote the general welfare.
My point is that the Republican trend, as identified in the OP, is correct and is a real danger to our form of Constitutional government. Uneducated voters are easily manipulated and have a recent history of electing a grossly unqualified candidate.
Under our Constitution legislators manage the laws for all persons within our borders. Support of the Constitution is their job, not getting re-elected by a targeted minority.
Democracy is not necessarily a good thing if the goal is effective governance, which seems to be your point. And I agree the goal of government is/should be effective governance, and that just because some process is democratic doesn’t mean it is good governance.
But the OP did not ask if democracy was a good thing, nor if it is constitutional. The OP asked if having one party appeal to the uneducated is good for democracy, and that specific question is what I was answering in the last bullet point of post #32.
~Max
I may be in error. I assumed the OP equates Democracy with current US government.
I could be in error, too. In the spirit of covering all bases,
Is it good governance that one of the two major parties appeals to the uneducated?
Not necessarily; appealing to the uneducated could easily lead to populism and short-sightedness typically associated with that class. Plus there are legitimate issues that the uneducated masses may not be cognizant of, or have the proper solutions to. But at the same time totally ignoring the uneducated is rather patrician and could lead to legitimate problems being overlooked. People without a college education can bring valuable perspective to the table, just like any other group. So to that extent, it is good that the uneducated have a voice at all, but not necessarily good that their voice commands the government.
~Max
If Republicans are Constitutionally meeting the governance needs of less educated citizens, they are promoting the general welfare and that should earn them registrations and re-election.
If Republicans are remaining in power by reducing the voting population and pandering to an uneducated, anti-government minority they are not promoting the general welfare and are in violation of their oath’s of office.
Then perhaps you should work for and support someone in the primary to run against him. Make him explain why he doesn’t feel obligated to explain himself to the voters.
It’s about leadership. You need to appeal to them, but you also need to lead. You need to be able to sell your uneducated base on your informed policy that you think will improve their lives.
What you shouldn’t do is let them lead you and join them in propagating actively harmful internet fueled delusions that you know are false.
Of course, I have no idea how to stop this from happening.
Indoctrination - If the population is indoctrinated by folklore and religious dogma they will seek reinforcement of those concepts in their leaders. If the population is indoctrinated by benign public education they will seek reinforcement of the political system extant.
There is no such person, and I don’t want to run myself. I don’t even think I qualify.
~Max
I remember reading about orca would butt into, nip at and otherwise harass a right whale until it gave up and let them eat its tongue. It was only the tongue but it would kill the whale anyway.
I’m seeing the same thing with my country.