Are Current Issues Too Complex for Democracy?

First, it needs to be said that I am a strong supporter of Winston Churchill’s statement: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”. I fully believe in the value of democracy and I would not want to have it any other way. But, recent events in democratic countries have allowed for doubt that the intelligence of the masses will guide humanity safely and peacefully through time: the rise of right wing parties in Europe and a general disenchantment with politics.

Firstly, have issues really become more complex? Probably not. But, people can access unfiltered information from all perspectives. The amount of accessible information is too complex. This leads to bound rationality, where people are not able to process all the information they can access and therefore make suboptimal decisions. That is, if people actually take time and try to process all the information. It is so much easier to let it be and let other people vote and decide. Why would I have to deal with tons of information every day, chose which information is relevant, balance different perspectives, and all that after working hard every day? It is so much easier to just not be politically active at all.

The recent midterm election in 2014 in the US might be a very good example of it. Especially, since education is a very solid predictor whether a voter is likely to vote or not (Washington Post, 2014).

Secondly, voters need to ask themselves whether they can still make informed decisions about relevant issues. Even business school graduates struggle to completely understand the financial crisis of 2007. How is a voter supposed to chose between several methods of solving the issue offered by different parties?  The easiest is to go with the option which is the easiest to understand. It does not matter whether this option is realistic, but at least the voter can justify why he or she stands for that option. Another example is a rural American citizen, who sees his bright sky and clean air and therefore is against any kind of environmental regulation. There is no reason for him to change his mind. If he went to some major Asian cities and actually saw the impact of air pollution as it happens there, he or she would not have any doubt about reducing his or her ecological footprint. A third example would be the IS situation in Iraq and Syria, where on one side the US is  against Assad in Syria but fights with him against the IS (which is only one paradox in this diplomatic chaos).

As the New York Times reports, there is a movement on the rise in Eastern Germany: PEGIDA (New York Times, 2014). Despite there only living less than 2% foreigners in that region and a minor proportion of those foreigners being Muslim, protesters are afraid of “Islamization”. But these rational arguments do not apply here. Fear and populism is a much better tool for politics than rational discussion.

The issues mentioned in this article should not encourage us to be less democratic. They just show the importance of education in democracy. Political and economic education needs to be part of every student’s curriculum if we want democracy to be as successful as it has been overcoming discrimination and racism.  On the other hand, politicians need to deal with fears and hopes of their constituents not by satisfying populist needs, but by educating and creating trust. But the abuse of power is a whole different topic and can be balanced by a strong and educated constituency.