Elections Are Bad For Democracy, opines the repellent NYT in a witty, Ivy League, condescending, smug, mendacious Op Ed. Perhaps that's harsh, the author argues that our current system encourages narcissistic power-heads to seek office. Why? So they can get rich off having power over you. Here's a concluding snapshot, Adam Grant's arguing for an Athenian lottery viz. electors:
A lottery would give a fair shot to people who aren’t tall enough or male enough to win. It would also open the door to people who aren’t connected or wealthy enough to run. Our broken campaign finance system lets the rich and powerful buy their way into races while preventing people without money or influence from getting on the ballot. They’re probably better candidates: Research suggests that on average, people who grow up in low-income families tend to be more effective leaders and less likely to cheat — they’re less prone to narcissism and entitlement.
Fair play, our governance is clearly broken, so let's get rid of Dominion, yes, they call themselves that, voting machines and do it all by chance and draw. Would things be better or worse? Hardly either which way, the same unelected satrapy being in control of the vast organism that is the secular super state.
Regardless, the optics are telling, don't you think, and how many of you are going to vote in the next totally free and fair election?
LSP
