The major problem with democracy is the foolishness of our fellow citizens. This may sound like an arrogantly partisan remark, but it is not. Wherever we are on the political spectrum, we all agree on that. Each of us would describe foolishness differently, no doubt, but no one denies that it’s there. And that raises an interesting possibility: Would it be possible for right and left to agree on the general specification of foolishness in politics?

Politically speaking, I am way out on what is often misleadingly called “the right” (i.e., the libertarian and conservative lot), but my general view would certainly be echoed by left-wingers, who are constantly astonished at the dumb way in which Americans vote for Bush or the British have gone along with the duplicities of Tony Blair over the Iraq war. And whenever tensions arise about Third World migration, many people express fright at the thought that “right-wing extremists” (not at all, dear reader, “on the right,” the way I am) might go on the rampage. The attempt to regulate “hate speech” assumes that simple and horrible people “out there” among the masses possess so little rationality that inciting words may induce them to commit vile acts.

These fears are rational, yet, as democrats, we are compelled by consistency to respect the opinions of others because we are reluctant to take away their right to vote. I conclude from this that the study of political naiveté, or foolishness, or perhaps downright