Democracy

[paraipan]

People are stupid...

i quit reading from there. Uneducated, living in an artificial society that rewards ignorance would be more correct.

[1714924518]

1714924518

[TiagoTiago]

People are stupid...

i quit reading from there. Uneducated, living in an artificial society that rewards ignorance would be more correct.

There are plenty of booksmart people out there doing stupid things all the time...

[gopher]

People are stupid...

i quit reading from there. Uneducated, living in an artificial society that rewards ignorance would be more correct.

+1

but also disguising a dictatorship as a democracy does not help them.

In the world we live demagogy is king, hypocrisy is the lingua franca and the puppet-masters have a field day every day

But in the long term, the democracy (excluding the perverted versions) is the only sustainable political system - all others sooner or later will be overthrown by the masses.

When they do so, will they get it right by choosing the only right political system? I doubt it - historically masses have always failed to choose the right system.

But there is a hope - the technology advances that has been made in the last 20 years may just have managed to educate the masses to a critical point where they can make the rational decision.

[speeder]

I believe solely in small states, the smallest as possible, to reach the maximum efficiency and whatnot, that way, there are no "masses" only a cohesive group of likeminded people, that do not have to decide stuff for other people hell far away and unknown... And that way, people can choose whatever government they like, be it direct democracy, depotism, monarchy or whatever.


I believe Singapore is a model to follow, and I do not mean imitate everything they do, or even their government, but follow what they did: Build a powerful military inside a single city, declare independence, do whatever you want and screw the UN.

[Elwar]

[hugolp]

I believe solely in small states, the smallest as possible, to reach the maximum efficiency and whatnot, that way, there are no "masses" only a cohesive group of likeminded people, that do not have to decide stuff for other people hell far away and unknown... And that way, people can choose whatever government they like, be it direct democracy, depotism, monarchy or whatever.


I believe Singapore is a model to follow, and I do not mean imitate everything they do, or even their government, but follow what they did: Build a powerful military inside a single city, declare independence, do whatever you want and screw the UN.

I think the same. Democracy could only work in very reduced circles and with some restraints.

When you start adding too many people democracy, any kind, just becomes a circus of manipulation and demagoguery. All the talk about democracy being the voice of the people and all the rest is bullshit. There is no perfect information and there are too many issues for everybody to be informed. Democracy is just government by manipulation of the masses.

[grondilu]

It's not just two wolves and a sheep, it's also the idea that democracy allows majority to vote for stuffs that should have no reason to be voted for in a first place.

Imagine how stupid a vote would be if it consisted in deciding which drink should people have for breakfast (tee or coffee that is).   Well, that's democracy.

Democracy implicitly assumes that everyone can mess with other people's business, as long as they behave like the herd.

[Bind]

this.

A Constitutional Republic with unalienable birth-rights is a well-armed sheep disputing the vote.

[speeder]

this.

A Constitutional Republic with unalienable birth-rights is a well-armed sheep disputing the vote.

And then, that sheep decides that is the wolves did not existed, that sheep live would be a lot easier.

[onesalt]

From this thread all I've managed to gather is that "if there was a 2:1 ratio of murderers to civilians then all the civilians will be exterminated by a majority vote" or something

[grondilu]

From this thread all I've managed to gather is that "if there was a 2:1 ratio of murderers to civilians then all the civilians will be exterminated by a majority vote" or something

It's a metaphor.   Change "murderers" to "thieves" and you'll get a better idea of the reason why democracy tends towards socialism, as everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.

[onesalt]

From this thread all I've managed to gather is that "if there was a 2:1 ratio of murderers to civilians then all the civilians will be exterminated by a majority vote" or something

It's a metaphor.   Change "murderers" to "thieves" and you'll get a better idea of the reason why democracy tends towards socialism, as everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.

If this was indeed the case why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

[speeder]

From this thread all I've managed to gather is that "if there was a 2:1 ratio of murderers to civilians then all the civilians will be exterminated by a majority vote" or something

You do not need murderers and civilians... You only need people with different backgrounds, that is usually sufficient for some hate.

For example, in Brazil, although black people are not racism target as they claim, there ARE a clear divide between south and north. In the north we have mostly blacks, native americans and mixed race people.

In south, we have mostly caucasians, specially from Germany, Italy and Portugal, and some good amount of asians (Brazil has the biggest japanese colony of the world).


Black and mixed race people living in the south, like, co-workers for example, are usually treated in a neutral manner...

But if you look comments on internet (specially twitter and 4chan) there are a very clear hate between north and south... north people say southerners are gays and playboys, and southerners say north people are lazy, stupid and ugly...

And the we have things like "Baiano"

"Baiano" is a guy from "Bahia" (a state in the north that has a considerable population).

But in the south, "Baiano" also means something that is so fancy that it looks ridiculous.... or means dark skinned low-worker immigrant...





So, what you think it would happen in a pure democracy? I am sure quickly south and north would try to vote each other out of existence.

[grondilu]

If this was indeed the case why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

It is, more or less. Most western countries are currently an heaven Lenin could not have dreamed of.

Of course, the current economic crisis is bringing all this to reality.  Welfare state is, as you said, an utopia.

[speeder]

States in general, are kinda doomed to fail as they get too big.

Just look at history, every 2000 thousand years, a major civilization fail, and minor civilizations fail a lot, and they all fail in the same manner:

As the state become more and more powerful, and start to do more and more what families should be doing (security, education, self-sustenance), people get lazy, individualistic and start to demand lots of rights. Those states soon become indebted, and fail to pay the police and army. Without the police and army, people have to fend for themselves, unfortunately, they do not know how to do that, since they relied on police and army... And that civilization then is destroyed.

[hugolp]

From this thread all I've managed to gather is that "if there was a 2:1 ratio of murderers to civilians then all the civilians will be exterminated by a majority vote" or something

It's a metaphor.   Change "murderers" to "thieves" and you'll get a better idea of the reason why democracy tends towards socialism, as everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else.

If this was indeed the case why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

Because "state socialism" does not work, its just a scheme to get power by a few, and it has to cut back regularly to avoid collapse.

[Elwar]

why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

Why isn't every country a rainbow colored unicorn?

[hugolp]

why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

Why isn't every country a rainbow colored unicorn?

Hahahahaha.

[FredericBastiat]

If this was indeed the case why isn't every country a socialist utopia.

That's a contradiction in terms. You can't be socialist and have a utopia, unless you're the only one doing the plundering or the gun pointing and you believe there are no such things as moral scruples.

[paraipan]

democracy is working = bitcoin > 51% voters make the law