For some time we, presumably, in sync with other American mainstream citizens, have been bewildered (and agonized) by the bizarre media reports that the race for the American Presidency, (given the contenders) continues to be close. Such reports have caused us to doubt the wisdom of the American democratic foundational message of “one man. one vote.”
To avoid misunderstanding regarding our previous statement, we would emphatically declare our firm beliefs in the following democratic principles: (1) All people are equal, despite their nuanced individuality (2) The proper aspiration of our democratic republic is to be a government ” by and for the people.” (3) A Republican Democracy is the most just and humanistic form of polity. (4) And notably, for the above principles of equality and democracy to be successful, ( as Thomas Jefferson, presciently declared) a literate and well-informed population is required, It is with this “4th” mandated principle that this writing is contextually concerned.
The nomination of Donald Trump for a second Presidential term, supported, by millions of fiercely loyal voters, despite his known perverse character, incapability, and demonstrated lack of moral compass, inarguably constitutes a popular demonstration of cognitive disorder when measured by the accepted principles referred to above; and, notably, with the beneficial aspirations of our Nation’s Founders. piously inscribed in the Constitution and systemically applied in its legislation and judicial precedent.
We have for some time, attempted to empirically reconcile Jefferson’s admonition, with our inherited national aspirations, however, under the circumstances of the contemporary political scene, we find it necessary, albeit, difficult. to question the prescience of Jefferson and of Benjamin Franklyn ( “…it is a Republic, if we can keep it,”) The political polls bizarrely continue to show the potential electability of Donald Trump, despite his publically known criminal and immoral record and notably, his public declarations to be a dictator.
We would thematically acknowledge the wisdom of Ralph Waldo Emerson: ” A foolish inconsistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.” In keeping with such unassailable advice, we would dare to make the following radical declaration: the one man, one vote principle, while unassailable as a democratic principle is not pragmatically suitable to our Nation, which, unfortunately, counts among its citizenry, a large population of inadequately educated and poorly informed citizens. We suffer the eternal threat of dangerous incompetence or tyrannical rule, by traditional adherence to such admittedly democratic, but, nevertheless, hazardous, principle; at least without some supplementary change in our system of electing a Chief Executive.
We have long and unsuccessfully ruminated on the existence of democratically feasible solutions to the enunciated, but problematic impact of one man, one vote viz., the existence of a large population of poorly informed and educated populist citizens, No sort of educative or cultural solution appeared to be pragmatically feasible or free of the possibility of tactical misuse. For better or worse our Nation is populated with a sufficiently ample number of poorly informed “populist” citizens. Consequently, to remove the hazard of political or policy disaster, a procedure must be beneficially devised, consistent with the traditional tenets of a Democratic Republic.
Relative to the empirically diverse nature of the American population, it is our view that the endurance of the democratic Republic may, prudentially and salubriously be assured by the following suggested procedure. If all prospective candidates for the August office of Chief Executive were mandatorily and thoroughly vetted (perhaps by a balanced or non-partisan panel) the selection of judgmentally acceptable candidates presented for selection for voters of every description would be far more suitable than that now presented which includes the celebrated, unhinged, and perverse Orange-haired reprobate. It may notably be observed that positions, we daresay, of the most mundane description, require previous scrutiny and acceptance; why not, perforce, America’s august and impactful office of the Presidency?
-p.
.
plinyblogdotcom 