
Though it seems like authenticity only matters in music, it's a frequent subject in politics, too. One way of arguing about it involves discussing the importance of "informed voters." One side, stressing the need for citizens to be fully informed about the issues and candidates if they are to truly represent their interests through voting, argues that political preferences based on less rational things like appearance, group affiliation, likability, or character (what fancypants political scientists call
affective qualities) are bad for democracy. The other side—which I suspect may be made up of only me—thinks that being fully informed is not only an impossibility but a undesirable state of affairs, that picking a party and sticking with it is fine, and that affective qualities are a perfectly legitimate way to pick a candidate. As irrational as non-fully-informed vote choices may seem, they often end up at the same place a more considered choice would have anyway, and so in the end there's not much practical difference. But there is a difference in the authenticity of your vote, and this matters to some folks. For them, politics is only truly "real" when it is the outgrowth of a philosophical journey, rather than an expression of base and quickly considered self-interest. What would these people make, then, of all the musical events of late supposedly designed to support Barack Obama?
More »