Or stupidity.

And in truth, the condition that Shenkman seems to be anatomizing is not so much stupidity as malleability. Americans are very good, he says, at being manipulated and lied to (to buttress his point, he offers a brief history of political ads) and we're equally good at lying to ourselves. Is it any wonder, then, that our current president was able to ram such an ill-advised war down our throats?

We have been taught to be malleable from the day we become aware of ourselves. WE MUST RESPECT AUTHORITY! We are taught to have faith in our parents, our elders, our police, our teachers and our government. we then get older and the powers that be know they can treat us like mushrooms (keep us in the dark and feed us shit) and they can do so without question.

Great letters, everyone! I always learn something reading through them all. This is the kind of Salon experience I've been missing these past several months, with the endless Obama/Clinton civil (or not so civil) war going on. Finally! Thoughtfully crafted letters and reasoned responses.

Ahhh, let me bask a bit. Mmmmm. Goodness.

Shenkman bases his entire thesis on the premise: We, the people, make electoral decisions based on what we know and ignorance leads to bad electoral choices. I agree with Gratefule Live. We, the People, vote more with our hearts, and less with our intellect. The framers of our constituiton didn't for once expect that the entire electorate will someday, somehow evolve into wise, thoughful public who will make informed decisions on who we elect to lead us. It is absurd to expect all of us to be knowledgeable of our political, social and economic environment AND choose our leaders accordingly. That's why we elect people who we believe are knowledgeable and capable. But that does not make us stupid. And even our choice for the last two elections does not necessarily make us stupid.

Here's why:

Democracy was not meant to rely on the intellect of the electorate; it was intended to appeal to the heart. It is like Bruce Lee in "Enter the Dragon" admonishing us "Don't Think - Feeeeel". Because the founders of this nation trusted that ultimately it will be our collective conscience that will make the right decision. The intellect, while better suited for other things, is unreliable when it comes to consensus building. Imagine the endless perfectly rationale but indecisve debates we would be getting into to elect our leaders. Look at the conflicting theories and opposing views on so many different aspects of scientific thought. It is only sporadic outbursts of intellectual brilliance of a few and hardwork by the rest of us that has shaped progress. But it is the heart of our nation that has elected our leaders.

The heart is the battleground where competing interests vie for our vote. This is where they play on our fears, our insecurities, our religious beliefs as well as our hopes, dreams and aspirations. Roe vs Wade, faith, family values, wealth distribution are the wedge issues that polarize us and are easy tools that aspiring leaders use to win us over. No matter how intelligent and inteligible you, as an individual voter are, how ALL OF US "FEEL" about these issues will always govern and shape how we, as a nation, make our electoral choices. While some of us might make rationale decisions, the majority cannot be expected to and will not participate in the process of rationalizing our electoral choice.

If we really believed in intellect to guide our electoral choices we would harness the intellect of a chosen few (a electoral think tank of sorts) to vote our leaders in. The electoral college comes close! Even in our judicial system if intellect could be relied on to uphold the law, it would be better to seat a panel of legal experts and judges rather than seat a jury of peers. Why, wouldn't they be more rationale and make the most informed decision? So when the attorney in his closing arguments says "Follow the evidence - do what you believe is right" the appeal is not merely to the intellect but primarily to the conscience.

when he went undercover at Hagees church. When you actually think your puking up demons into a paper bag, it's time to question your ability to make informed choices. If you actually WANT the world to end, I don't want you picking my rulers. I don't care if this sounds "elitist", these people should not be allowed to vote. We already keep mentally retarded people from voting on the grounds they cannot reason correctly, it is time to expand that criteria to include people who use their pastor as their barometer. Particularly one who acts just like those old school bosses of the thirties and forties. Only this time for the other side.

These people are puppets on strings which means they are already not using reason thus making them dangerous. As much as I appreciate the idea of equal votes for all, if you are trying to "hurry up" the end of the world, you are too dangerous to have the vote. Sometimes ideals have to take a back seat to reason and sanity. Writing foriegn (and in the case of rights, domestic) policy based on a 3000 year old book that could have been written by anyone is not sane or reasonable by any objective standard.

Try this sometime, separate what you know to be fact from that which you assume to be fact. The second column will be much longer than the first. Then ask yourself why you make these assumptions and how has it benefited you to make them. Once you begin to sort things out for yourself, you're thinking, and once you're thinking you become curious, and curiosity is the true fountain of youth.

This could be the reason that I found George W. Bush beneath contempt - it was obvious the first time I heard him open his mouth that he had no intellectual curiosity and, if you continually have trouble putting a sentence together, you are having trouble mustering a clear thought. Starting a war with no plan is unforgivable.

Having a lot of ignorant people isn't anything new and it didn't start with the advent of pop culture, film, radio, television, or social network websites. I know a lot of people who couldn't make the distinction between the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, couldn't tell you what the various branches of government are and why they exist, or what the term Fourth Estate means let alone understand its roll.

They make a living, raise families, and live for leisure time and activities. Not much different than what thinking people do. I can't even say that the thinking people I know have a higher level of satisfaction with their lives than the unquestioning folks. I do have a difficult time being around them and become bored very quickly. Sometimes I hate myself for not being able to feign interest or to successfully steer the conversation in a direction where we might find common ground.

But I'll also make a distinction between ignorance and politics. I'm interested in a wide range of subjects, including politics. Not all thinking people I know are interested in politics or could discuss in depth current policies and political events. In fact, I suspect some of them vote with the same level of information as the ignorant people.

I do know this: True freedom is knowledge. The more you know how to handle on your own, the less you need to rely on others. I also know that no one knows everything and our lives are all made richer by others - whether they can tell you how the Italian letter factored into the propaganda generation in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq, or not.