A Condescending and Divisive Narrative

I just read a dreadful post by Benjamin Jeffrey, revealing his less-than-savory take on a New Yorker article.

In it, he delineates “low-information voters” as some kind of lesser group, branding them as a threat to democracy. The condescending and patronizing tone of his post cannot go unchallenged. It reeks of elitism and ignores the everyday struggles and realities of millions of hardworking Americans who, for reasons beyond their control, might not have access to the same political resources or time as those in more privileged positions.

Here’s the real threat to democracy: dismissing and demeaning the very people that the system is meant to serve. Branding a significant portion of the electorate as a "problem" because they don’t adhere to some arbitrary standard of political knowledge only serves to alienate and divide. What we should be doing is fostering engagement, leveling the playing field, and ensuring that all voters have access to accurate, reliable information—not shaming them for not knowing the latest policy debate.

Benjamin, your post about “low-information voters” is nothing short of condescending and deeply patronizing. To frame a significant portion of the electorate as a "threat to democracy" simply because they don’t adhere to some elitist standard of political engagement is a blatant dismissal of hard-working Americans who might not have the time or access to engage in the same level of political consumption that you deem necessary.

Labeling voters as "low-information" based on your arbitrary criteria isn’t just insulting—it’s a fundamental misunderstanding of what drives people to the polls. Your argument presupposes that access to information, time, and even interest in politics are universal luxuries. They are not. Many voters are balancing jobs, families, and personal struggles, often in environments that limit their exposure to the kind of information you expect them to have. Dismissing them as less informed or easier to manipulate is not only demeaning but reveals a deep disconnect between your ivory-tower perspective and the realities of everyday American life.

Moreover, your post ignores the systemic issues that create these so-called "low-information voters." Instead of addressing the root causes—like educational inequities, lack of access to reliable news sources, and a hyper-partisan media landscape that preys on fear and misinformation—you’ve chosen to target the voters themselves. It’s not that people aren’t capable of engaging critically; it’s that the system itself often disenfranchises them through lack of resources and access.

What you’ve presented here reeks of elitism, the very kind that drives disillusionment and further disengagement. Rather than working toward solutions that would empower and educate voters, your approach seeks to alienate and dismiss them. This is not the way to build a more informed and engaged electorate—this is how you deepen divisions.

In truth, democracy thrives when all voices, no matter their perceived level of information, are heard. Instead of shaming voters, we should be looking for ways to level the playing field, ensuring that everyone has access to the tools they need to make informed choices—not branding them as threats because they don't meet some arbitrary information threshold.