In Jason Brennan’s second chapter of Against Democracy (2016) multiple topics are discussed pertaining to the political action of voting. Throughout this chapter Brennan explores the ideologies of rational ignorance and rational irrationality about politics, as well as the psychological benefits of holding firm to an irrational belief, and the cognitive biases or errors displayed in society. Brennan’s views create controversy and often times don’t seem to directly favor one another. Although I admired the viewpoints Brennan gave, I had a difficult time buying into the philosophical ideas he presented. As we progress in this paper, we will learn more about Brennan’s narrow view of politics being only associated to voting. Brennan created adequate argument for the philosophical measures he presents, however this strict polices don’t seem to equate with democracy in its entirety.
Within the second chapter of Against Democracy (2016), we become aware of rational ignorance about politics and rational irrationality about politics. These two subjects hold considerable weight in Brennan’s expression of what it means to be political. Rational ignorance is when the costs of acquiring knowledge surpass the benefits of having that knowledge (Brennan, 2016). In relation to politics, which Brennan exclusively only refers to as voting and not any other political action, rational ignorance is when there is no benefit to learning political matter because you vote will not matter or produce
More than two-hundred years ago, thirteen young nations defeated a tyrant thousands of miles away. The prize for such a victory was self-government. For the first time in human history, a nation had handed over supreme executive power to the masses. Exercising this power has become a hallmark of being an American. Even today it is thought of as one of the most patriotic acts one can undertake. The thought of a nation run by popular vote is a comfortable enough idea, but in the case of the United States, a self-governed population threatens to destroy itself and possibly the world through wasteful spending, unregulated pursuit of profits, and a blotted military budget.
The topic that I have chosen regarding Bryan Caplan’s book is the topic of rational ignorance. Bryan Caplan defines rational ignorance as a voter’s belief that one vote has a small probability of changing the outcome of an election. Several voters are rationally ignorant, myself included, which after reading The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies I have to ask myself why even vote at all other than it is considered by some to be a civic duty.
b. Articles of Confederation – first constitution of the US adopted during the last stages of the revolutionary war, created a system of government with most power lodged in the states and little in the central government. Ratified in 1781 by requisite number of the states; passed @ second continental congress in 1777
No matter where one goes there will always be a set of rules that govern what behaviors are acceptable, and therefore create a certain society around that. Robert Dahl wrote the essay entitled “Why Democracy?” to explain the effects of government own its citizens. The Midshipman Regulations are no exception to influencing the society of the regiment. They create a society that closely mirrors the society Dahl envisions in his essay. The Midshipman Regulations intentionally create a certain kind of atmosphere that provides an outlet for moral responsibility, to develop as a person, but at the same time restricts numerous freedoms. Dahl’s idea of a democratic society closely follows what the Midshipmen Regulations are trying to create, but would
In our system of government we are privileged with the option to take part in the political process that runs the country. It is our right to vote that lets the people influence change in policy and set the guidelines that politicians must follow to be elected representatives. This precious ability, which is most coveted in most non-democratic countries, is taken for granted in our own.
A voter can be defined as an individual who votes, or has the right to vote, in elections. Voting behaviour is explained using the concepts of expressive voting and strategic voting. A rational voter would act more strategically, that is, the voter would vote to produce an election outcome which is as close as possible to his or her own policy preferences, rather than voting on the basis of party attachment, ideology, or social group membership (expressive voting). Strategic voting has become more important than voting on the basis of political cleavages (expressive voting), so voters have become more rational in their approach, however there is always an element of expressiveness in their behaviour. Political parties were initially formed to represent the interests of particular groups in society however, as these parties became more universal in the appeal of their policy programmes, voting behaviour shifted from expressive to strategic. This essay explores the reasons behind the declining importance of political cleavages, and the rise of strategic voting.
The author of the article, “The right to vote should be restricted to those with knowledge”, Jason Brennan, argues that the United States should consider an alternative political system, called epistocracy, which would replace our current democracy. By saying this, the author explains how epistocracy retains the same institutions of democracies, such as the bill of rights, checks and balances, etc., but that it takes away the citizens equal right to vote. The author further goes into depth about the many ways of instituting epistocracy, which would be by granting additional votes to citizens who can demonstrate certain credentials, or by calculating the public’s “enlightened preferences” and using that data instead of the public’s original vote. Finally, the author describes one
The behavior of voters has great importance to politics as the people decide mainly who wins. The study of the behavior of the electorate has increased as politicians seek to appeal to the voters and find ways to gain followers and most importantly votes. The two articles Democratic Practice and Democratic Theory and The Responsible Electorate discuss the behavior of voters in the United States, and the importance of the electorate.
Combs, James E., and Dan D. Nimmo. The Comedy of Democracy. The United States of America: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996. Google books.com. Web. 30 May 2014.
In his article, Democracy as a Universal Value, Amartya Sen asserts that democracy is a universal value. In order to develop his argument Sen needs to state his definition of democracy and define what he means by universal value. In the course of Sen's argument he gives his view of the relationship between democracy and the economy. He then defends his view of democracy as a universal value against a main argument that deals with cultural differences between regions.
The United States of America is one of the oldest contemporary democracies, is currently the second largest democracy, and is ranked the 16th best democracy in the world (Campbell et. Al, 2014). Yet there is a legitimate question over whether or not the United States can still truly be considered a democracy, with some studies even suggesting it has begun to resemble an oligarchy (Chumley, 2014). In this essay, I will use Dahl’s criteria of voting equality and effective participation to determine whether or not the United States are truly a democracy.
According to one of rational choice theory’s prominent and more thoughtful contemporary exponents, Peter C. Ordeshook, “four books mark the beginning of modern political theory: Anthony Downs’s An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957), Duncan Black’s Theory of Committees and Elections (1958), William H. Riker’s A Theory of Political Coalitions (1962), and James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock’s The Calculus of Consent (1962). These volumes, along with Kenneth Arrow’s Social Choice and Individual Values (1951), began such a wealth of research that political scientists today have difficulty digesting and synthesizing all but small parts of it. Consequently, the full value of this research often goes
Churchill’s claim that “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried” is deliberately provocative and intended to challenge the reader’s simplistic ideal that democracy is without faults. There are an estimated 114 democracies in the world today (Wong, Oct 3rd lecture). A figure that has increased rapidly in the last century not necessarily because democracy is the best form of government, but primarily for reason that in practice, under stable social, economic and political conditions, it has the least limitations in comparison to other forms of government. Be it the transparency of a democratic government or the prevalence of majority rule, all subdivisions of democracy benefit and hinder its
one essential conviction, expressed in the word democracy itself: that power should be in the hands of the people. Although democracy today has been slightly inefficient in this idea, with the wealthy, elite class challenging this right, “it nevertheless claims for itself a fundamental validity that no other kind of society shares….” To completely understand the structure of democracy, one must return to the roots of the practice itself, and examine the origins in ancient Greece, the expansion in the Roman Empire, and how these practices combined make what we recognize as today’s democratic government.
In his article, Democracy as a Universal Value, Amartya Sen asserts that democracy is a universal value. In order to develop his argument Sen needs to state his definition of democracy and define what he means by universal value. In the course of Sen's argument he gives his view of the relationship between democracy and the economy. He then defends his view of democracy as a universal value against a main argument that deals with cultural differences between regions.