In Reply

Sean posed a good question on his blog. This is an attempt to answer it.

So, how can we, a society of garbagemen, investment bankers, extreme sports enthusiasts, kickboxers, short-order cooks, tech support phone operators, and Wal-mart greeters be qualified to choose our leaders? Well, I agree with you that we can't. While the presidency could be seen as an extention of running a small business, and maybe, at its core, it is, the American political game has made the situation much more complicated. What's more, is that most of our founding fathers agree with you. True democracy on the national level died in Athens. The closest example in our history is the New England town meeting, which was never applied on more than a local level. Democracy is probably the most inefficient form of government. Remember that constitution thing you probably heard about once or twice in highschool? It was never the intention for populace to elect the president. The president would be elected by the Electoral College, whose members would be appointed by state legislatures, who were elected by the people. The elites of the early years of our nation saw the most notable citizens of communities who comprised state legislatures appointing some of their finest to elect the president. The oft unruly House of Representatives was the haven of the people, and they had to share their power with the Senate. All this considered, I'm not saying that we shouldn't elect our leaders. In fact, I maintain that it is essential that we elect our leaders.

The political elites of a nation must be held accountable for their actions by someone other than their peers. Ideally, and usually in the case of the U.S., that's us, the public at large, the librarians, doughnut bakers, and stockbrokers. If the elites are the only ones with the power to keep tabs on the elites, then the little guy suffers, if not with the current leaders, then sometime down the road. Through this important check, somehow we've been able to maintain a government that's been more or less of the people, by the people, and for the people for 230 years. It is not a question of qualification, it is a question of the necessity of maintaining our most basic national ideals.