This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← Civility in American Politics: How to Get (Some of) it Back

aquilacane's Avatar Jump to comment 2 by aquilacane

Comment 1 by AtheistEgbert

The important point is, ordinary people are not making rational choices and decisions when it comes to choosing their political leaders.

It is rational for herd animals to herd. They don't really pick their leaders, they pick their group. Their leaders pick them. Like any product, it is a case of supply and demand. If I see a group with a demand, I supply it. Which group is the most profitable for me.

Were I to pick a target market for my art, the religious might seem profitable. They act very devoted to their brand and are willing to spend a great deal on it. Likewise, the people who buy pornography are very brand loyal (the brand being nudity), so I could pick them and be assured of sales. I noticed on Ebay art sales that almost every nude had a bid whereas the others were mostly blank.

So, I pick the market that I benefit from the most, just as a politician picks the political party that best suits them. Bob Rae,The Canadian NDP turned Liberal, demonstrates this approach with his entire political career. The people making poor rational choices are actually the ones dictating the sales pitch. It's the politician who is making the poor political choice by pandering to an ethically questionable market.

Voters can only vote for those who are running. If those who run align themselves with the voter, they do well, if they align against the voter they do poorly. If none of the politicians align with the voters, the voters complain of having to pick the candidate who is the lesser of two evils.

Has the voter made a good democratic choice if the candidate succeeds at creating prosperity and health despite not representing the voter or has the voter made a good democratic choice if the candidate represents their wishes even if the candidate fails horribly at creating prosperity and health?

never mind the fact that it would be irrational for a religious person to vote against a god they believe has complete power over them, if they are being religiously manipulated into voting a certain way. If someone can vote against their religion, then they really have a problem. I wouldn't even consider these people atheists if they were to switch over because they obviously can't process information at any meaningful level. They are functionally mental slaves, do as you wish with them.

We speak political language before they do, they just mirror us to see what sticks.

Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:57:04 UTC | #930715