Democracy: designed to fail

[infoterror]

1. Almost everyone on the planet thinks most of the others are morons. Few people can run their lives sensibly.

2. The larger the group of humans, the fewer comprehensive decisions are made; a lowest common denominator is achieved.

3. Democracy is based on the poor judgement of these masses further hobbled by group decision-making, and we assume it is the best possible leadership.

How are these three compatible?

 

[Blowtus]

What alternatives do you propose?
I agree with you to a fairly large degree, and have my own ideas - I just think the criticism of something without suggestion for further options seems a fairly popular passtime amongst the corrupt-esqe bunch...

 

[JColtrane]

America is a decent alternative to democracy, IMO.

 

[derbeder]

given the title of the thread and the rhetorical question at the end of the post one would think that (1-3) are things assumed by people who think of democracy as a just system of government. i first thought you were going to try to show that people who believe in democracy have inconsistent beliefs.
but someone who thinks democratic governments are just need not believe in (1) and surely won't believe the first conjunct of (3). actually, (1-3) seem to be things you are putting forward. it is strange for you put us a rhetorical question as to whether (1-3) are consistent, if these reflect your beliefs. hence i am somewhat reluctant to claim that you are indeed making the claims in (1-3). this makes it hard to interpret the post.
this is yet another worthless thread so far. if there are some aspects of democratic government that you wish to criticize, do it clearly and try to produce a good reasoning. self-delusional sensationalism does not really cover up poor argumentation.
i am not claiming anything in favor of democracy at this point; all i want to hear are some good reasons against it.

 

[Seditious]

Few people can run their lives sensibly?

dear corrupt.org / livejournal.com

 

[Scourge of God]

There are two basic problems with democracy as I see it:

1. Democracy pretty much demands an informed electorate to function (or even to genuinely reflect the will of the people). Most people simply don't have the time to work around their other responsibilities to truly be informed about the significant issues of the day. Others lack the discipline or native faculties to be informed. What this means is that voters instead tend to rely on a shorthand version of reflecting their 'will' - basing their decisions not on an objective evaluation of the issues, but on a subjective reading of which candidates are most 'like them.' Which means a lot of times you're going to end up with powerful societies led by Commander Guys.

2. Democracies excel at preserving the status quo in a haze of frantic motion. Because they give the appearance of change and the addressing of issues, while actually perpetuating more of the same, entrenched democracies represent the most stable form of government. However, they are also woefully inadequate in crisis and essentially unable to address larger metaissues (cultural decline, environmental degradation, the coming Chinese hegemony) because the solutions to these problems require real leadership and imply at least a short term decline in the material comfort of the majority, precisely the sort of solutions that democracies are pretty much structurally designed NOT to deliver.

 

[infoterror]

What alternatives do you propose?
I agree with you to a fairly large degree, and have my own ideas - I just think the criticism of something without suggestion for further options seems a fairly popular passtime amongst the corrupt-esqe bunch...

You're just uninformed. Complete solutions here. I'll take that apology now, thanks

 

[infoterror]

Few people can run their lives sensibly?

Absolutely.

$500 apartments and $50,000 cars... no retirement fund, no health care, buying tons of plastic junk and not providing for their kids.

Maybe it's a "real world" thing, and it hasn't come to your area or you haven't been forced to see it (sidenote: Good -- avoid it as long as possible).

 

[infoterror]

1. Democracy pretty much demands an informed electorate to function (or even to genuinely reflect the will of the people).

Not just informed. They need to have that particular intelligence and skill required for leadership, which at best one in a thousand have.

So the other 999 just fuck things up with their ignorant vote.

Democracy is also a mindset... "The world owes me attention." Heh.

 

[Seditious]

Absolutely.

$500 apartments and $50,000 cars... no retirement fund, no health care, buying tons of plastic junk and not providing for their kids.

Maybe it's a "real world" thing, and it hasn't come to your area or you haven't been forced to see it (sidenote: Good -- avoid it as long as possible).

not everyone needs to be thrifty. some people will pick up the materialistic women and have someone to share their money with and seem to have made the sensible choice. maybe they won't even live to be 60 and need retirement money. who're you to say how people should spend their money? Sure poverty mafuckas buying cigi's seems like 'not a sensible use of money', but hell, if it makes poverty a little more bearable than having an extra 6 bucks a week would, why shouldn't they?

 

[Έρεβος]

I just think the criticism of something without suggestion for further options seems a fairly popular passtime amongst the corrupt-esqe bunch...

I don't think so. Corrupt seems to propose just as much solution as it does criticize the current. I think it is more that their criticism hits right on the dot, while their solutions are, while somewhat good in theory, in reality just as bad (centralized fascism), or simply unworkable ("post"-humanism). I find a great deal of what corrupt says to be very right, but just the concrete solutions they propose to be flawed - there should be no such concrete and drawn out solutions to such problems. Really, I would find corrupt to be a great deal better if they did not attempt to create solutions, but rather went entirely upon opening people's eyes to the disgust, while supporting people thinking to work towards a solution with their own ideas rather than corrupt's manifesto solution. There is nothing wrong with showing something pathetic without showing an alternative; it just forces you to think of what would be better, formulate your own solutions.

 

[infoterror]

I think it is more that their criticism hits right on the dot, while their solutions are, while somewhat good in theory, in reality just as bad (centralized fascism), or simply unworkable ("post"-humanism). I find a great deal of what corrupt says to be very right, but just the concrete solutions they propose to be flawed - there should be no such concrete and drawn out solutions to such problems. Really, I would find corrupt to be a great deal better if they did not attempt to create solutions, but rather went entirely upon opening people's eyes to the disgust, while supporting people thinking to work towards a solution with their own ideas rather than corrupt's manifesto solution.

Interesting. I've sent it on to the staff mailing list for anal-ysis.

 

[Blowtus]

I don't think so. Corrupt seems to propose just as much solution as it does criticize the current. I think it is more that their criticism hits right on the dot, while their solutions are, while somewhat good in theory, in reality just as bad (centralized fascism), or simply unworkable ("post"-humanism). I find a great deal of what corrupt says to be very right, but just the concrete solutions they propose to be flawed - there should be no such concrete and drawn out solutions to such problems. Really, I would find corrupt to be a great deal better if they did not attempt to create solutions, but rather went entirely upon opening people's eyes to the disgust, while supporting people thinking to work towards a solution with their own ideas rather than corrupt's manifesto solution. There is nothing wrong with showing something pathetic without showing an alternative; it just forces you to think of what would be better, formulate your own solutions.

I disagree. There is no challenge in picking faults, anybody with half a brain and their eyes open can do that. Coming up with a firm plan / solution that doesn't have just as many, or more, is the point of difficulty. Flaws on a micro scale become simply a compromise / choice in the system on a macro scale.

I still couldn't find any solutions listed besides 'autonomous local communitys' (does the level of autonomy granted extend to letting them merge leadership with neighbouring communities, as autonomous communitys have done in the past, leading to the present situation?) and restriction of various forms of speculative investment. There are lots of vague ideas about 'how good things would be' but no thought through plan that I was able to find.

 

[Έρεβος]

I disagree. There is no challenge in picking faults, anybody with half a brain and their eyes open can do that. Coming up with a firm plan / solution that doesn't have just as many, or more, is the point of difficulty. Flaws on a micro scale become simply a compromise / choice in the system on a macro scale.

Criticizing & bringing to light to corruption and idiocy of an era is very far from "picking faults." Anyone with half a brain can come up with specialized solutions, which mean nothing. No single human solution/institution of a solution is going to do anything real, only the educating of generations so that they may all use their own minds to work towards a better world. It may seem rather democratic, but it is the masses whom hold the concrete power, and the weight of solving problems falls upon the masses. No genius can create a perfect solution, and no genius should waste his or her time upon such. The real way of bringing about positive change is by opening the people's eyes, and though this is not immediately rewarding, it is what truly matters in the end. This makes it so all are contributing to the solution, so that it is a competition of survival of the fittest, of evolution, that the best solutions for the given environment/situation may survive, while the foolish solutions die. The best solution to accord to humanity is that which comes about naturally, by the laws of human nature.

Also, one of the greatest parts of arriving at a better solution is questioning the present solutions. Without questioning we would dogmatically stick to solutions no matter how horrid they are, as the flaws are never painted clear, and the solutions seems to work fine. This is what modern society does, creates solutions without honestly questioning them, and we ignore all the flaws which would be apparent even to a very simple quick questioning. Criticism is just as vital to any solution as the solution itself; it is fundamental.

 

[Έρεβος]

I still couldn't find any solutions listed besides 'autonomous local communitys' (does the level of autonomy granted extend to letting them merge leadership with neighbouring communities, as autonomous communitys have done in the past, leading to the present situation?) and restriction of various forms of speculative investment. There are lots of vague ideas about 'how good things would be' but no thought through plan that I was able to find.

And it would have been better how if it did? Written out plans on such are the same as vague ones - irrelevant. Though by being vague they could have been simply giving examples of better working systems, while not being so stupid as to actually think out a plan for no reason.

 

[infoterror]

I still couldn't find any solutions listed besides 'autonomous local communitys' (does the level of autonomy granted extend to letting them merge leadership with neighbouring communities, as autonomous communitys have done in the past, leading to the present situation?) and restriction of various forms of speculative investment. There are lots of vague ideas about 'how good things would be' but no thought through plan that I was able to find.

You may not have been looking hard enough! Try reading to the end of the document, and taking notes in outline form.

Autonomous communities are established in contrast to the present stage, which evolved from political and not organic reasons. It is thoroughly corrupt.