The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies Book

Writing a book that says voters are misinformed and make bad decisions is not as hard a sell as it might have been in 2007. This may have been a book designed to provoke as much as it is to advance an argument.

Caplan, an economist at George Mason whose most recent book is on the societal benefits of more immigration, has a bone to pick with some of the older economic explanations of voter behavior. Specifically, he attacks Anthony Downs' book "An Economic Theory of Democracy" and more broadly public choice theory - their position is that there is not enough benefit for voters to learn more about complicated issues that do not apply to them. Caplan does one better - to oversimplify, he has the simple explanation that people vote based on what they believe. What they believe does not always fit labels. When people have incorrect beliefs, they do not experience consequences immediately for having those beliefs, and so they are insulated from their consequences from the vote. It is a simple theory, and it is appealing because of that.

Of course, voters can be self-interested or more 'economic' - voting for welfare benefits for themselves or a reduced tax burden, etc. - and Caplan overstates his case for what is only a 'bias' and what is an observation. Manufacturing workers who lost their jobs are understandably more skeptical of free trade, for example.

Assuming this isn't only a provocation, Caplan has his suggestions - refraining from encouraging voter turnout, creating limits on what voters can decide and shifting that to representatives or an unelected bureaucracy, shifting more to markets, or encouraging education.

I don't know how to address voters making bad decisions besides the last recommendation and that takes time; I personally value democracy because it's a system where the winners and losers don't always try to kill each other after every transfer of power.

Could everything here still be taken at face value? I doubt it, but this could be useful as a teaching aid or close reading, where each part of the argument is taken seriously.