I agree completely, see one of my other replies on this. I only meant the less influence they have on who wins and who loses, in the sense of picking and choosing.
That's a good point. Perhaps a weaker claim is just the idea that people in power (or more generally, people of influence) are as likely to have skin in the game, which can only drive engagement on the issue. That's different to many issues for which those in a position of power are often less affected directly.
The issue is that they sway elections. Why is it more important how they sway elections versus the amount of influence? It seems the latter would have a greater effect.
The intuition is that freer political systems are both more challenging and less rewarding to subvert, because no individual person or group has overwhelming power.
"more influence" is enough. In a democracy, nobody has but "influence", that's called "checks and balances". Giving real power to any human being --elected or not-- is generally a bad idea.
Perhaps, but there are usually people in positions of power that care and for better or worse probably have more influence than the general electorate.
Right. I think some people simply prefer less concentration of power. I suspect it boils down to personality, maybe the big five traits largely determine where one sits with respect to freedom/control of other peoples.
I'm not sure it's that simple. Even if some people have more influence than others, it is still different from having one person, who can efficiently do whatever they please.
The problem is it's much harder to moderate power structures, because that requires changing them from the inside, which they themselves are incentivized to prevent.
It sounds like you believe those in power are more astute or intelligent than those they exercise power over. I disagree. I don't think there is a positive correlation between a person's ability to impose their preferences on others and the quality of their preferences. If anything, I would guess there may be a negative correlation, considering the kind of person who is likely to become a successful politician. Thoughtfulness and intellectual rigor is not exactly reward in politics.
I would also bet that those who are the most interested in imposing their preferences on others probably are way less likely to listen to or attempt to understand different perspectives, leading to not even understand the views and practices they seek to ban.
reply