Quote Originally Posted by MrShrike
Sure....but what good is the will of the government if the politicians are misinformed and swayed by falsities?

How do you have any assurance that one is more accurate than the other?

Ultimately, you don't, in my view. There are experts in government you might say, but so are there in the general public.
But the experts in government actually play a meaningful role in making government decisions, while the experts in the general public don't play a meaningful role in forming public opinion. The government hired it's experts expressly for the purpose of advising and informing it's decision-makers; sometimes, the experts ARE the decision-makers. Public opinion doesn't attach a large amount of significance to the advice of the small number of experts mixed into the general public, though; the influence of the experts (or even of well-informed laymen) is directly related to the proportion of the general public which they comprise, and that proportion is small. The small number of experts in the general public don't have much sway on public opinion simply because most people don't consult the experts before formulating their opinion on nuclear safety. Public opinion on Yucca Mountain certainly didn't reflect the knowledge of the experts, because if it had, the public opinion wouldn't have been nearly so negative.

Again, I'm not necessarily saying the government should have bucked public opinion on this one, but it doesn't really make sense to claim that public opinion is just as valid as government decisions because the public has experts too.