I don't understand your point Steve. Of course the manager wont be able to do the analysis better than the expert analyst. The type of micro-management that you accuse me of supporting is simply the opposite extreme from apathy. Its a pretty lame defense of an extreme position (apathy) to point out that there is an opposite extreme, and to accuse the critic, with no evidentiary basis, of holding that opposite extreme.

Should a commander-in-chief be deciding specific bombing targets, or moving company-sized units around the battlefield? Obviously not. Should a commander-in-chief find matters of war boring and uninteresting and just the let the experts do whatever they think right? Obviously not either.

Are those the only alternatives?

"Your implicit answer is that managers should be extreme micro-managers..."

No Steve, that is not my implicit answer. It is pure strawman argumentation on your part because, I imagine, you have no good response.

"Now, when it comes to representative democracy...well you've hit upon another reason why it often isn't such a great way of doing things."

Funny how some libertarians seem to ride their ideology right off the deep end. Freedom of the individual becomes freedom from the effects of living with other individuals leads to an aversion to democracy leads to ...what?

She simply thought that the water was in a big underground lake one her land and nothing was going to change her mind because she was either unable or (more probably) unwilling to understand how the water table works. But hey ignorance sometimes is not only bliss but profitable!!!

Under the direction of elected officials who you have a responsibility to hire or fire.

I really dont understand this attitude.

Your attitude is the one that is hard to understand? Should the manager be able to do the analysis better than the analysts he has working for him? Should he be involved in every aspect of the analysis or should he delegate to somebody whom he knows has a solid grasp of how to do the types of analysis that his group is supposed to do? Your implicit answer is that managers should be extreme micro-managers which is a huge waste, both of the managers time, the analysts' time and probably even of the shareholder's money.

Now, when it comes to representative democracy...well you've hit upon another reason why it often isn't such a great way of doing things. First there is rational ignorance which is what James is talking about, an second there is the irrationality of the electorate and politicians who exploit that irrationality. Case in point, George Bush and his continual use of the fear of terrorism to push through many of the things that absent that fear we'd likely not support. Another example, Al Gore and his over the top nonsense about global warming. According to good ol' Al we'll be living in Waterworld if we don't listen to him.

Mostly because islamofacism constitutes an immediate threat.

Look out, Bithead! Islamofacism is in the back seat!!!

So why do you care about what goes on in places like Iraq?

Mostly because islamofacism constitutes an immediate threat.

So why do you care about what goes on in places like Iraq?

"There are people with genuine expertise in that sort of thing and they create the regulations which govern how neighborhoods are built, what sort of businesses can go where, how waste is managed, and so forth.'

Under the direction of elected officials who you have a responsibility to hire or fire.

I really dont understand this attitude. It is not enough to simply take pride in your apathy - because clearly there things you may be apathetic about, but other things that you are not at all apathetic about. So the question is, why are you apathetic about environmental issues and not the other issues that you write about a lot - many of which are probably far less consequential to the quality of life of you and your descendants.

reminds me of the old joke

Yeah, that's where I got the headline. I care that people care, I guess, but other than that....

"Sir, how do you feel about ignorance and apathy?"

"I don't know, and I don't care."

Which is pretty much how I feel about much of that quiz.

I think we should be cautious about being too dismissive of the need to know some basic facts about how one's habitat works. Is is possible to make an informed decision about policies in your city or town without knowing something about the mechanics of the cycle of food, water, and waste disposal that makes life in your city or town possible?

In my view democracy requires some level of generalist behavior on the part of its citizens. That's probably why specialists have an inclination towards technocracy.