Some time ago, it was proposed by a politician in the United Kingdom that only people who fully understood the election issues should be allowed to vote. That sounds like an outrageously elitist statement, but on thinking about it a bit more there is a certain amount of rationality to it.

A democracy aspires to establish a government which truly represents the wishes of the majority of its citizens. Much effort is put into establishing voting and election procedures, which also aspire to ensure that representation is properly elected. While the theory is good, its implementation is very challenging and in few places more so than here in the Philippines.

A serious flaw in the democratic process is indeed the ability of the electorate [the voters] to understand the issues over which candidates for representation are in disagreement. In America, they try to overcome this problem by holding televised debates between candidates on matters of importance in their respective election promises. They also seem to spend a lot of time in third party analysis of opposing election manifestos. All this to try to ensure a public awareness and basic understanding of the things for which the candidates stand, and their plans for improving things should they win sufficient votes to be elected and appointed to represent the people.

In less sophisticated societies, little time is spent in trying to educate the voting public on the pros and cons of election issues. In such less sophisticated societies, you would think that more time should be spent on this in order to at least try to ensure an educated and aware casting of votes. Well, it doesn’t really seem to happen like that and the absence of informed understanding of the issues at stake becomes a serious flaw in the proper implementation of democratic policy. The vote is an important tool, it represents an individuals’ ability to have his views and opinion heard in the government of the society to which he or she belongs.

To be responsibly able to decide whether you should give to vote to candidate A,B,C or D, you need to understand which one of them holds views closest to your own wishes and who is most likely going to have the will to fight for them and prevail against opposing views. It’s not just whether or not you like the looks of a particular candidate. For democracy to work as the theory sets out, there is a need to understand why and where votes should be cast.

There are currently suggestions that there should be restrictions on the maintaining of so-called political dynasties. Perhaps there should be some controls. But then again in a paternalistic society such as the Philippines where the members of the political dynasties are well known and have done a good job for the communities they represent, and the members of the dynasties have been groomed for governance, then there could be singular advantages to it. Like the “Guardians” of Aristotle.

But is it reasonable to expect that the voters of the Philippines should be aware of the theories of Aristotle in relation to the benefits of governance by the Guardians? Of course it isn’t, thus direct democracy would not work—beside its impracticability. Was there anybody in the last elections who promised to rid the Philippines of political dynasties? I doubt it, but in any event what would that have meant to the voters?

The voters cannot be expected to be aware of the pros and cons of all the arguments surrounding electoral issues, but there should be some effort put into trying hard to help them to understand the policies that their vote can influence, and needless to say the politicians who represent the citizens should use their positions to bring about better education for the voters so that they can really see that their representatives are doing, or going to do what is best for them, or at least what they think they want. Otherwise, the voters would be the tools of the politicians rather than as it should be, the other way around!

So, back to the title. You cannot win an argument with an ignorant man, regardless of how much power or money such an individual may have. If you know more, he has to decide whether or not to believe you and then whether or not to trust you.

Mike can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.