Self-study
To win democratic elections that are not fully subsidized by the government, nonwealthy candidates must be supported by wealthy patrons. ████ █████ █████████ ███ ██████ ████ █████ ██████████ ████ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ███ █████ ███ ███████ ███ █████████ █████ ███ ███████ █████████ ███████ ██ ███████ █████ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████████ ████ ██████ ██ ██████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author believes that nonwealthy candidates in democratic elections that aren’t fully subsidized by the government will not compromise their views in order to win the support of wealthy patrons. This is based on the fact that wealthy people are distributed among different political parties in equal proportion to their proportion among the overall population.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author overlooks the possibility that winning the support of wealthy people might require changing one’s own views, even if one can find wealthy people in one’s own political party. For example, a Democratic billionaire’s views might be different from a Democratic candidate. That candidate may then need to change her views to win the billionaire’s support.
22.
The argument is vulnerable to █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ████
a
the primary function ██ █████████ ███████ ██ ███████████ █████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████ █████████ █████ ███ ██ ██ ███████ █ █████ ██ ████████ ███ █████████ ██ ██████ ██ █████████
The purpose of parties irrelevant. We’re concerned with whether having the wealthy in various parties shows that the nonwealthy don’t need to change their views to get a wealthy person’s support. Why parties exist doesn’t affect whether a candidate might have to change her views.
b
in democracies in █████ █████████ ███ ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ █████████ ████████ ██ █████████ ███████ █████ ██ ████ ████ ██████ ████ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ██████████
This possibility shows why a nonwealthy person might need to change their views to win a wealthy person’s support. Even if a wealthy person is part of the candidate’s party, that doesn’t mean the views of the party or the wealthy person in the party are shared by the candidate.
c
in democracies, government-subsidized █████████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ███ ███ ██████ █████ ███ ██ ██████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ █████████
The argument concerns democratic elections that are NOT fully subsidized by the government. Even if countries with subsidized elections ensure against being “overly influenced” by the wealthiest, that doesn’t suggest anything about countries without subsidized elections.
d
in democracies in █████ █████████ ███ ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ █████ ██ ██ ██████ ███ █ ███████ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ██ ███ █ ██████████ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ████████
The argument concerns whether a nonwealthy candidate needs to change her views to win support of a wealthy person. Whether an election is easier to win for a wealthy person than for a nonwealthy person has no impact on whether a nonwealthy person needs to change her views.
e
a democracy in █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ █████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ██████ █████ ████ █████ █████
The argument concerns whether a nonwealthy candidate needs to change her views to win support of a wealthy person. Whether there are other flaws in a democracy has no bearing on whether a nonwealthy candidate must change her views.