CDZ The Rule of the Majority -- Is it really all that good an idea?

[320 Years of History]

Of late, Donald Trump has been speciously making claims about the value of the majority's vote...nevermind that he's not even garnered the votes of the majority of his party, only a plurality of GOP voters' votes. But this isn't about Trump of his votes or remarks about the primaries; his remarks are merely a foil that catalyzed my thoughts to create this thread.

Have you seen this story: VIDEO: Reporter Steve Campion rescues man trapped in high water on live TV ?

If that man who drive the Honda into the water thinks roughly with the skill possessed by the majority of typical Americans, then we need to scrap the idea of majority rule, and we really should have done so long ago.

1. The man drove into what amounted to a river at that moment in time.
2. Upon hearing the news crew yelling at him, he opened the passenger door and the first words out of his mouth were, "What should I do?", to which the news crew replied, "Leave the car. Swim." Duh!
3. The driver said, "I didn't think the water was that deep." Say what?!? The man should have ended that sentence with "think;" because the depth of the water causally had nothing to do with the predicament in which he got himself.

Steve Campion didn't rescue the man from a car. He rescued a man temporarily from the man's own abject stupidity!

At the end of the video, Steve Campion says, "These are dangerous conditions." Well, I don't entirely agree. The conditions are dangerous only to folks who are as stupid -- I mean stupid, not ignorant -- as that man who drove his car into water that he couldn't be sure was or was not too deep, and being uncertain, just drive on into the water, only to, upon opening the car door, not even at that point have the presence of mind to realize that maybe, just maybe, swimming away from the car might be among the best things they can do at that moment in time.

If you ask me, that man's voter registration card should be permanently revoked. The idea that that man can actually walk into a voting booth an cast a vote that can potentially contribute to the way my future and my kids' futures pan out is among the scariest things I can imagine. I can only hope he abstains from voting.

I now and forever have thought that the folks who invented "majority rule" did not ever intend that term to mean "majority of people who reached the age of majority," but rather that they meant "majority of people who have more than half the sense God gave a goose." And to amplify what that means, I ask you, do you think a goose, or a mouse, or a cat, or any other creature that can swim, upon the car door opening, would have needed to be instructed to swim away from the car? Would anything other than a stupid-ass human have stood there looking at the newsperson like a deer in the headlights not only wondering, but asking "what should I should I do?" I mean really!!! Come the "F" on!!!

 

[william the wie]

I think you are mistaking arrogance and borderline psychosis for stupidity

 

[oldsoul]

Of late, Donald Trump has been speciously making claims about the value of the majority's vote...nevermind that he's not even garnered the votes of the majority of his party, only a plurality of GOP voters' votes. But this isn't about Trump of his votes or remarks about the primaries; his remarks are merely a foil that catalyzed my thoughts to create this thread.

Have you seen this story: VIDEO: Reporter Steve Campion rescues man trapped in high water on live TV ?

If that man who drive the Honda into the water thinks roughly with the skill possessed by the majority of typical Americans, then we need to scrap the idea of majority rule, and we really should have done so long ago.

1. The man drove into what amounted to a river at that moment in time.
2. Upon hearing the news crew yelling at him, he opened the passenger door and the first words out of his mouth were, "What should I do?", to which the news crew replied, "Leave the car. Swim." Duh!
3. The driver said, "I didn't think the water was that deep." Say what?!? The man should have ended that sentence with "think;" because the depth of the water causally had nothing to do with the predicament in which he got himself.

Steve Campion didn't rescue the man from a car. He rescued a man temporarily from the man's own abject stupidity!

At the end of the video, Steve Campion says, "These are dangerous conditions." Well, I don't entirely agree. The conditions are dangerous only to folks who are as stupid -- I mean stupid, not ignorant -- as that man who drove his car into water that he couldn't be sure was or was not too deep, and being uncertain, just drive on into the water, only to, upon opening the car door, not even at that point have the presence of mind to realize that maybe, just maybe, swimming away from the car might be among the best things they can do at that moment in time.

If you ask me, that man's voter registration card should be permanently revoked. The idea that that man can actually walk into a voting booth an cast a vote that can potentially contribute to the way my future and my kids' futures pan out is among the scariest things I can imagine. I can only hope he abstains from voting.

I now and forever have thought that the folks who invented "majority rule" did not ever intend that term to mean "majority of people who reached the age of majority," but rather that they meant "majority of people who have more than half the sense God gave a goose." And to amplify what that means, I ask you, do you think a goose, or a mouse, or a cat, or any other creature that can swim, upon the car door opening, would have needed to be instructed to swim away from the car? Would anything other than a stupid-ass human have stood there looking at the newsperson like a deer in the headlights not only wondering, but asking "what should I should I do?" I mean really!!! Come the "F" on!!!

Where I live only the truely stupid need to be told, "Hey, it's getting colder outside, it's September, better get ready for winter." The smart/wise of us, never have to "prepare for winter", we are never NOT prepared for winter. Winter is not a season here, it is a way of life. The cold (sub-freezing temps) usually start in September, and last well into April. I mean really, do you need to be told that winter is coming, when it comes at the same time ever year? Do you need to be told not to drive into running water on the road? Do you need to be told that it's not a good idea to leave your campfire unattended? What's next, public service anouncements every two hours to remind people to go to the bathroom? Where does this insanity stop?

 

[Elvis Obama]

I agree with your basic thesis, but you should cut this guy some slack. There's a difference between intelligence and panicking in an emergency. This guy might not be someone you want in a foxhole with you, but he may (repeat, MAY) be trustworthy in a voting booth, nonetheless. As long as it's dry.

But is a puzzlement, as the King would say. In general I am a Jacksonian (minus the hair-trigger temper). I believe in a stronger federal government than did the Jeffersonians, and I certainly don't think the property holding requirement for the franchise should have been maintained. What should have been considered, though, is the benefit of rule by the elite. That's what we really have anyway, whether we acknowledge is or not, isn't it? Smart people thought up our system of government, and smart people campaigned to get those ideas ratified by other smart people. Those who could understand the arguments being made in the Federalist Papers and many other local newspaper efforts on behalf of ratification. How many could do so now, amongst our current electorate?

Robert Heinlein postulated an America in which the franchise could only be earned through military service. Others have suggested that HS students should be required to pass a US citizenship test, like immigrants have to pass, in order to receive their HS diploma, and that this would help to guarantee that people would have an understanding of how the government functions and what their responsibilities to the government are. What benefits are available to them seems to be no problem. No one has any problem learning that.

 

[william the wie]

Well if the capital markets teach anything it is that the majority is always wrong and that thought, much less math, should be avoided in favor of doing something conventional ,tried and stupid.

 

[320 Years of History]

This guy might not be someone you want in a foxhole with you, but he may (repeat, MAY) be trustworthy in a voting booth, nonetheless. As long as it's dry.

ROTFL

agree with your basic thesis, but you should cut this guy some slack. There's a difference between intelligence and panicking in an emergency.

Red:
Sure...I could have considered that it may be possible his limbic system's "flight or fight" functionality:

• Did what in some folks it does do and caused him to freeze instead of flee --> Okay, that's possible but that suggests he's of "inferior" genetic stock and doesn't deserve to remain among the rest of the species lest he breed and pass on whatever be the genetic trait that doesn't allow his flight response to "kick in" as effectively as it does in some others of the species.

Evolution would "weed out" that genetic line. I'm okay with that. Moreover, I don't have much of a problem with social Darwinism either, although that situation was more driven by natural conditions than by social ones.

What should have been considered, though, is the benefit of rule by the elite. That's what we really have anyway, whether we acknowledge is or not, isn't it?

Rule by the elite is what always has been and will always be. It's unavoidable. Even if one (or some) who isn't among the elite assumes a leadership role, that individual (or group), upon assuming the power and responsibility of leadership, of rule, immediately becomes elite.

Smart people thought up our system of government, and smart people campaigned to get those ideas ratified by other smart people. Those who could understand the arguments being made in the Federalist Papers and many other local newspaper efforts on behalf of ratification. How many could do so now, amongst our current electorate?

I don't know. I know only what share of those among us I think should be able to do so.

Robert Heinlein postulated an America in which the franchise could only be earned through military service. Others have suggested that HS students should be required to pass a US citizenship test, like immigrants have to pass, in order to receive their HS diploma, and that this would help to guarantee that people would have an understanding of how the government functions and what their responsibilities to the government are. What benefits are available to them seems to be no problem. No one has any problem learning that.

Funny that....and yet that it is that, is no laughing matter.

 

[william the wie]

let's face it, about 40% of our population is not really functional in the modern world. Where I differ from the above diagnosis is as follows.

Injuries account for most dysfunction as in the majority of Civil War vets were twitchy enough to create the terms tramps and hobos.

Lead poisoning and its elimination correlates more strongly with the decline in crime in the developed world than any other factor.known to be causative.

This list can be extended but only about 50% of dysfunction can be attributed to genes and the real question is how much selection is optimal given internal and external economies of scale.

 

[320 Years of History]

I agree with your basic thesis, but you should cut this guy some slack. There's a difference between intelligence and panicking in an emergency.

One other thing, indeed the most important thing: the man willfully drove his car into water that he had no idea of whether it was or was not "too deep." That's where his stupidity is most manifest..that event occurred before his having to be told to exit the car and swim away. Am I there too being too harsh in my assessment? I obviously don't think so.

"When in doubt, do without."
-- Saying of many a wise person​

 

[320 Years of History]

let's face it, about 40% of our population is not really functional in the modern world.

I cannot help but think:

• The same 40% who today exist would have perished in the pre-modern world as a result of their dysfunction.
• The same 40% may not in a pre-modern world have even come to exist by dint of evolution having culled their lines from the species/gene pool. It could even be that my line was among those culled? I don't know...Perhaps among my ancestors, I am the genetic anomaly....I don't know that either. I know only that I'm fairly fit for the world in which I find myself and my ancestors were similarly fit (as evidenced by my own existence) for the one in which they lived.
• I hope the share of dysfunctional folks among our population is not more than 40%.

 

[william the wie]

Another thing to consider is just plain bad luck. The Trail of Tears began (1835) before Jackson revealed how stupid/arrogant he truly was with his half witted unwinding of the 2nd bank of the US. Most Cherokee, like the ancestors of myself and Elvis, simply bribed/intimidated local, state and Federal officials to be left alone. But even with a foreign press corps nearly as big as the army units making the country and especially the army look like a pack of incompetents for the better part of two years didn't budge the idiot in charge. That kind of stuff does happen.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"The Rule of the Majority -- Is it really all that good an idea?"

It’s a dreadful idea, which is why we’re a Constitutional Republic.

The Framers envisioned a free and democratic society where private citizens, in the context of private society, would address the conflicts and controversies of the day and find resolution to those conflicts and controversies absent unwarranted involvement from government.

And when government involvement is warranted, the people express their will through their elected representatives.

When the people err and enact measures repugnant to the Constitution, government is again warranted to invalidate such measures via the judiciary, consistent with the rule of law, in no way ‘violating’ the ‘will of the people.’