“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” — Thomas Jefferson, letter to Charles Yancey, 1816. 

I fully acknowledge that to many this post will smack of elitism, but the facts of the matter stand irrefutable. Ignorant, uninformed and irrational voters constitutes the single greatest threat to the success of modern democratic institutions.

In a 1947 speech to the House of Commons, Winston Churchill is said to have quipped, “…democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried…” (Langworth 2009). What is it about democracy that renders it so imperfect? While numerous arguments against democracy have sprung up from time to time, nearly all criticisms have noted one great flaw in particular. As John F. Kennedy put it, “the ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.” Winston Churchill based his skepticism of democracy on the very same thing stating, “the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Indeed, the very founding thinkers of the democratic institution feared the ignorance of voters. Aristotle proclaimed, “it… is dangerous for men of this sort to share in the highest offices, as injustice may lead them into wrongdoing, and thoughtlessness into error” (Aristotle 1946). The simple fact of the matter is that “almost every democratic theorist or democratic political actor sees an informed electorate as essential to good democratic practice” (Hochschild 2010).

Our modern political era and the global rise of populism seems to be illustrating to the world the implications of an uniformed and ignorant electorate. Take last night’s so called “Brexit” vote in the United Kingdom, in which UK voters at a turnout greater than 70% elected to leave the European Union. The vast majority of leave proponents were white, blue-collar, under-educated individuals who were dissatisfied about their independence and economic prospects in a globalizing world. Many of these individuals cast their ‘leave’ vote for economic reasons, despite the fact that a group of 10 Nobel-prize winning economists advised strongly against it stating, “the economic arguments are clearly in favor of remaining in the EU” (Asthana and Treanor 2016). Perhaps, more shockingly, 80% of American voters supported a leave vote in Britain, though the prospect of any positive repercussions for the US are slim to none (Sola 2016). Only time will tell the ultimate consequences of this impassioned vote, but it is not looking likely to favor those who supported it most. Far too often in today’s political landscape, voters’ flawed opinions are based on the propaganda of populist leaders who, out of political ambition and ulterior motives, have risen as a “voice for the peoples’ discontent.” Similar trends are happening in France and the United States where white, under-educated, blue-collar individuals feel rightfully threatened by the prospects of the globalized world about which they have managed to remain blissful ignorant. This has led many uninformed and irrational voters to follow the campaigns of populist candidates with extreme positions and inflammatory speeches, which on an intellectual level amount to little more than incoherent pandering and very little actual policy. In his ground-breaking work “The Myth of the Rational Voter,” Bryan Caplan explained this phenomenon stating “What happens if fully rational politicians compete for the support of irrational voters — specifically, voters with irrational beliefs about the effects of various policies? It is a recipe for mendacity” (Caplan 2007). A recipe for mendacity… if I had to choose one word to describe the political careers of figures like Donald Trump (USA), Boris Johnson (UK), and Marine Le Pen (France) it would be, mendacity.

So what is to be done? Steve Chapman of the Chicago Tribune lamented, “The most concerted efforts to inform voters won’t work unless voters have good reason to learn. And they don’t. After all, a person who learns a lot in order to vote intelligently has almost zero chance of changing the outcome of any election. Aside from the feeling of virtue it may confer, it is an irrational indulgence. Ignorance, by contrast, is perfectly rational.” George Mason University Law Professor, Ilya Somin, in her much praised book, “Democracy and Political Ignorance” pointed out that “political knowledge levels have risen little if at all over the last several decades, despite major increases in education and the availability of information. Demand for information, not supply, is the main constraint on political learning in a world where most people are rationally ignorant about politics” (Somin 2013). In other words, we have allowed our modern democratic systems to degrade to the point that informed voting is irrational, while voting in ignorance is rational. This affects the entire manner in which politics plays out in the modern era, and has become a self-fulfilling prophesy of inept, undemocratic and self-destructive government.

In considering a possible solution to this great flaw of democracy, Bryan Caplan asks,

“Would we still have a “democracy” if you needed to pass a test of economic literacy to vote? If you needed a college degree? Both of these measures raise the economic understanding of the median voter, leading to more sensible policies. Franchise restrictions were historically used for discriminatory ends, but that hardly implies that they should never be used again for any reason. A test of voter competence is no more objectionable than a driving test…Both bad driving and bad voting are dangerous not merely to the individual who practices them, but to innocent bystanders” (Caplan 2007).

It is hard to deny that such a solution constitutes educational elitism, and is unacceptable and unrealistic. However, I do not believe that we have to merely accept a world in which ignorance of politics is the rational position. In his Chicago Tribune article, Steve Chapman muses,

“This is an election year, which means all of us will spend the next few months carefully following the campaigns, finding out all we can about the candidates’ proposals and pondering what issues are most vital for the nation’s future. Just kidding. Most of us wouldn’t do that if you tased us to within an inch of our lives. In fact, many won’t learn the most rudimentary facts about the people running for office and the policy issues they will have to address. Some of us will jump to believe any half-baked rumor or stereotype that confirms our prejudices. We’ll vote to reward or punish incumbents for events that they have nothing to do with. Some voters won’t even find out the names of the people running for many offices. In short, the citizenry as a whole will carry out what looks like a giant cartoon parody of democracy.”

Sadly, this “cartoon parody of democracy” is more than likely how this election year will play out, but it doesn’t have to be that way. Why is it that so many citizens feel more patriotic and impassioned about suiting up in military gear and dying in foreign wars than researching political and economic policy and voting responsibly? Don’t get me wrong, I believe the brave and honorable sacrifice of our military men and women is an essential part of our democratic existence, but perhaps fewer of them would have to die in unnecessary wars, if we made the effort to be a little better informed about foreign policy, and voted accordingly. Perhaps we would not have to fear immigration and globalization, if we made a minimal effort to step from the dark of cultural ignorance into the light of understanding, and voted accordingly. Perhaps we would not have to fear for religious liberty, if we learned what liberty for all religions meant, and voted accordingly. Perhaps we would not have to beg crumbs from the one percent if we all learned just a tiny bit more about economic policy and regulation, and voted accordingly. Perhaps we would not have to fear being mowed down by an assault rifle at the movie theater if we studied a little bit more about the actual second amendment and sensible gun regulation, and voted accordingly.

The list goes on and on, and one might easily say, “I don’t have time to go researching all of that,” but in an age with such quick and easy access to information, it is irresponsible and undemocratic to think you deserve a right to vote while neglecting ample opportunity to suit yourself to that right. Ignorance breeds populism. Populism based on ignorance breeds poor policy. Poor policy breeds fumbling economies and failing democracy. Upholding democracy and honoring your right to vote means researching and informing yourself of the facts around policy positions, and voting accordingly. This is simply not done by reading pundit tweets and watching talking heads on cable news. So what can we do? We can research an issue by reading a scholarly article (published in respectable peer-reviewed journal). We can participate in lively policy debate using facts from scholarly sources and not from pundits seeking retweets, bloggers seeking page views, and cable news entertainers seeking ratings. We can hold our elected officials responsible based on policy position not party. And last, but certainly not least, we can enter the ballot box armed with information and facts, not opinions and rhetoric, and we can vote, intelligently, responsibly, truly democratically. Thomas Jefferson was right to warn that we can be ignorant OR free, but not both.

References and Additional Reading

Caplan, Bryan. 2007. “The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies.” Princeton University Press. Online. Retrieved from http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa594.pdf

Chapman, Steve. 2012. “Mixing ignorance and Democracy.” The Chicago Tribune. Online. Retrieved from http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-19/news/ct-oped-0419-chapman-20120419_1_political-ignorance-league-of-women-voters-democracy

Fowler, Anthony and Margolis, Michele. 2013. “The political consequences of uninformed voters.” Journal of Electoral Studies (2013) 1-11. Retrieved from http://www.michelemargolis.com/uploads/2/0/2/0/20207607/fowlermargolis_electoral_studies.pdf

Hochschild, Jennifer. 2010. “If Democracies Need Informed Voters, How Can They Thrive While Expanding Enfranchisement?” Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy 9 (2), June 2010: 111-123. Retrieved from http://scholar.harvard.edu/jlhochschild/publications/if-democracies-need-informed-voters-how-can-they-thrive-while-expanding-en

Jefferson, Thomas 1903-04. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Memorial Edition, 20 Volumes. Washington, D.C: Thomas Jefferson Memorial Association.

Langsworth, Richard. 2009. “Democracy is the worst form of government.” Richard Langworth Online. Retrieved from https://richardlangworth.com/worst-form-of-government