David R. Hoffman: Why dishonest leaders thrive on voters’ blind trust

EDITOR'S NOTE: The views and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not of Ottawa News Network.

Several years ago, an excellent television series called “Hustle” appeared on the BBC. 

“Hustle” was about a team of Robin Hood-style con artists who would target other grifters and crooks who preyed on the innocent.

The major premise of this series was that it was easier to con dishonest people than honest ones, because the dishonest were always susceptible to schemes to make easy money.

Experts who study interpersonal communications, however, have discovered that this isn’t necessarily true. The reality is that because dishonest people are dishonest, they are also often extremely cautious, do not take others at their word and are more suspicious about opportunities that seem too good to be true.

Honest people, by contrast, often presume that those they interact with are honest as well, and thus frequently let their guard down and unquestioningly believe what others tell them.

In a famous essay, Issac Asimov wrote, “There is a cult of ignorance in the United States and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that ‘my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.’”

In other words, the fundamental flaw of democracy is that while both ignorant and intelligent people vote, there are more of the former than the latter.

It is important to know that in this example, ignorance is defined as having the mental abilities to be informed yet consciously refusing or being denied the resources to exercise them.

This might explain why so many state governments are comfortable with “brain drain” and have declared war both on higher education and education in general. After all, the prospects of perpetually holding onto elected office, regardless of how corrupt or inept a politician is, are enormously enhanced when honest, but ignorant, people are oblivious to the reality that they are being conned.

While there may be some veracity in Asimov’s observations, anti-intellectualism is secondary to the real problem facing American democracy: Politics has become such a loathsome and despicable profession that, with rare exceptions, only the most venal, hypocritical, mendacious and sociopathic people are attracted to it.

This, in turn, incessantly leaves voters with the unsavory prospect of having to choose between the lesser of two evils, knowing that, either way, evil is going to prevail.

This is not hyperbole. Dr. Kevin Dutton has argued that many professions, in addition to politics, are the playground of sociopaths or psychopaths. These include lawyers and judges, media personalities, corporate executives and even religious leaders.

In a perverse way, this makes sense. All these professions, in some form, seek to manipulate and control other people’s minds and separate them from their money. They also require a sense of conscienceless detachment from the harm they do to others.

Examine the evidence:

• What kind of people does it take to dodge the draft, yet jingoistically send young people off to die in wars built on lies just so they can win an election or re-election, or thump their chest and proclaim how “tough” they are?
• What kind of people does it take to own numerous mansions, private jets, and luxury cars, and still guilt pensioners into sending them money?
• What kind of people does it take to knowingly argue to a jury that an innocent person should be found guilty, just to bolster their conviction rate?
• What kind of people does it take to unnecessarily remove employees, especially those with families, from their jobs and health insurance, just because having one hundred and ten billion dollars is more important than having one hundred billion?
• What kind of people does it take to knowingly exaggerate or say things they don’t believe, just because manufacturing outrage and injecting hate into society brings them clicks, views and money?

For years, many critics have viewed democracy as a mechanism that gives the illusion of change without the reality of it. Sadly, as long as the superrich continue to buy politicians like trading cards, this isn’t going to change.

While there is no easy solution, perhaps it is time not only for a viable third party, but one funded by regular people with regular wages. Granted, this won’t be easy, especially since the politicians these third-party candidates will be seeking to displace are the same ones whose economic policies have left the poor and middle-class with little disposable income.

Hopefully, if this does happen, these third-party candidates will openly campaign on the fact that they do not take money from billionaires or special interests. But, perhaps more importantly, they should campaign on the fact that they have consciences and compassion, virtues that too many of America’s so-called “leaders” woefully lack.

— David R. Hoffman is a retired civil rights and constitutional law attorney.

How to submit an opinion

Ottawa News Network accepts columns and letters to the editor from everyone. Letters should be about 300 words and columns should not exceed 1,000 words. ONN reserves the right to fact-check submissions as well as edit for length, clarity and grammar. Please send submissions to newsroom@ottawanewsnetwork.org.