Democracy: a distraction?

[infoterror]

How this process of erosion happens: we're all in a room arguing about how to put out a fire. All agree the fire must be smothered. One person suggests water; another suggests sand. The room is divided into three camps now, which are water, sand and neither/undecided. In the meantime, the goddamn fire is getting bigger. So, smart Politician from the water group realizes he must do the same thing advertising execs do, which is to make sure his viewpoint is distinctive. Where once upon a time his slogan was "Water -- smothers better than sand," he's now catchily humming a new jingle, "Water is the opposite of fire." The sand camp reacts in horror, and releases their own little bombshell, "Sand is rock and rock isn't changed by fire." Where they formerly agreed on 80% of the task -- smother the fire -- and differed only on the materials used, they now agree on nothing and have constructed two radically different approaches. This is a simplified version of the erosion that in every democracy creates a radical-ish party and a reactionary-ish party to oppose one another; ideas, distinct narrowly at first, are by thousands of repetitions of this differentiation process made into extreme opposition for the sake of currying votes.

http://www.corrupt.org/articles/arbitrary/i/

 

[speed]

How this process of erosion happens: we're all in a room arguing about how to put out a fire. All agree the fire must be smothered. One person suggests water; another suggests sand. The room is divided into three camps now, which are water, sand and neither/undecided. In the meantime, the goddamn fire is getting bigger. So, smart Politician from the water group realizes he must do the same thing advertising execs do, which is to make sure his viewpoint is distinctive. Where once upon a time his slogan was "Water -- smothers better than sand," he's now catchily humming a new jingle, "Water is the opposite of fire." The sand camp reacts in horror, and releases their own little bombshell, "Sand is rock and rock isn't changed by fire." Where they formerly agreed on 80% of the task -- smother the fire -- and differed only on the materials used, they now agree on nothing and have constructed two radically different approaches. This is a simplified version of the erosion that in every democracy creates a radical-ish party and a reactionary-ish party to oppose one another; ideas, distinct narrowly at first, are by thousands of repetitions of this differentiation process made into extreme opposition for the sake of currying votes.

http://www.corrupt.org/articles/arbitrary/i/

Its egalitarianism and self interested capitalism and materialism that is the base problem, not democracy. Democracy worked for a long time in this country, and continues to work in other civilized countries. Now we have a bunch of same-thinking persons, who only care about their personal wealth and safety of said personal wealth.

 

[infoterror]

Its egalitarianism and self interested capitalism and materialism that is the base problem, not democracy.

But doesn't democracy naturally lead to those?

 

[speed]

But doesn't democracy naturally lead to those?

Thats one of those chicken and egg questions. I actually think unrestrained capitalism combined with the corporate culture lead to such problems; but its hard to really know.

 

[infoterror]

Thats one of those chicken and egg questions. I actually think unrestrained capitalism combined with the corporate culture lead to such problems; but its hard to really know.

Yet Democracy places the focus not on what's best for the whole, but waht the individual perceives as best for them personally. It's a kind of utilitarianism. How can that NOT lead to selfishness, greed and sodomy?

Capitalism was greedy before corporate culture!

 

[Europa Ascendent]

But doesn't democracy naturally lead to those?

'Democracy' is both cause and consequence.