 |
A few years back I wrote that the fundamental issue in American politics was the electoral system itself, since it inaccurately reflected the will of the people. But not this time. Critics may have mocked the eccentricities of California's recall provision, but this result is an indictment not of the electoral system but of the people participating in it. I wrote after the 2000 election went to the man who received over half a million fewer votes than his chief opponent that it wasn't a huge deal — either his policies would be reasonable, or two years later the Democrats would surely sweep the Congressional elections and balance would be restored. I could hardly have been more wrong. His administration turned out to be blatantly reactionary, and in 2002 his party gained seats. Apparently the people are pretty much getting what they want.
Three years ago I would have been fulminating against an electoral system that could result in Governor Schwarzenegger... but now I have to accept that the problem is not the way Schwarzenegger was elected, but the fact that given the choice, half the electorate wants to be led by a bodybuilder. Or a pro wrestler. Hell, throw in the entire cast of Predator. I fully expect Carl Weathers to become the next governor of Louisiana. This shouldn't be happening, but the fault lies less with the electoral system than with the educational system. We live in a country where adults with college degrees can be asked on NPR whether they're concerned about Schwarzenegger's vagueness on policy matters and reply, "I don't care about policy blah blah blah! He's the TERMINATOR!" On the face of it, Schwarzenegger's candidacy should have been taken no more seriously than Gary Coleman's, but the "shoots people in movies = good leader" demographic was sizeable enough that the Republican establishment threw its legitimacy (such as it is) and money behind him in hopes of riding these idiots to the statehouse.
It's very depressing. Democracy is no better than any other type of government when you don't have an educated electorate, and we don't, not in the ways that matter. Schwarzenegger's campaign has been built around feeding the notion that he'll be putting on some wraparound sunglasses and perhaps a leather jacket, strolling into the statehouse, firing off a few tired one-liners from his old movies, and the bureaucrats in the state legislature, finally inspired by his unprecedented "leadership," will solve all of California's fiscal woes and, blammo, everyone will have a "fantastic job." And millions bought it, at least subconsciously. They made it through the California school system thinking that's how government works, that in case of a financial crunch you just send a big tough guy to "clean up Sacramento," possibly by, like, shooting the deficit or something. We heard much the same stuff in 2000: you'd see voter after voter on TV saying things like, "Well, if Bush does anything bad, his mom's a tough old lady and she'll keep him in line" as if government were an episode of "Good Times."
Over the past few days I've caught myself thinking, "Well, maybe it's not so bad — now when the economic crisis gets even worse the Republicans'll have to answer for it and maybe we can finally ditch Prop 13 and get the state moving in the right direction again." Uh-huh. Yeah. If history's any guide, the budget deficit will balloon, social services will be slashed, and Republicans will answer for the state's woes by going on to win the Assembly.
|