It’ll do for now
December 6, 2006Golden oldie by Winston Churchill:
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.
As many of you know, I ain’t no fan of democracy. It’s the least bad form of government, but my god, does it suck. I’d much rather have a benevolent ‘dictatorship’, where a government remains in power until the people decide they want change (no idea how that would work in practice but you get my point), eliminating the nuisance of elections as much as possible. I’d love for the Royal Family to get more power.
But oh well. It’ll do for now.
Politics | 
Oh, this is Thom? That sounded like Eugenia there.
Comment by Dan Brokeau — December 6, 2006 @ 3:52 am
Another quote from Winston Churchill:
It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
Comment by Edwin — December 6, 2006 @ 12:49 pm
That’s the problem, though, isn’t it? If you get a really bad (democratic) government, you at least have the solace that they’ll be voted out in three to eight years, and in the meantime you can blame the rise in unemployment/taxes/crime or the fall in wages/standard-of-living/moral-fibre-of-the-nation on a government voted in by the custards who make up the majority of the voting population.
With a dictatorship, the chances of getting a benevolent dictator are 50/50 at best - I know the Queen (of the UK) would make a good politician (if that isn’t an oxymoron), and possibly so would either of the last two Queens of the Netherlands - but Charlie (Prince Charles) for Benevolent Dictator-King? No thanks.
Comment by Jeff Rollin — December 6, 2006 @ 3:20 pm
>Oh, this is Thom? That sounded like Eugenia there.
I agree with Thom that democracy does not work as it should be. It’s not optimized to deliver the best to the everyday people. Depending on the country, either the job security sucks, or the health insurance sucks, or this or that.
But I don’t agree with Thom about the royals, because you never know if the prince that just got born is going to be a good person or a freaking idiot. You can’t control that, not even his/her royal parents can. And I don’t like leaving things on chance.
Therefore, as Edwin said, democracy simply sucks less than all the rest forms. Although I could settle for a *logical* totalitarian society. Problem with this is that again, you don’t know if the council that will come to power at one time start to put restrictions on simple pleasures and things, e.g. just as ancient Spartans had laws about how long their beards must be.
Comment by Eugenia — December 6, 2006 @ 8:15 pm
Dan:
I have criticised the concept of democracy since my early teens; in fact, I have several essays here, written round when I was 15-17 about this very subject– that was long before I even knew about OSNews and Eugenia :).
Democracy is bad because it does not bring forth the best leaders. It brings forth the best speakers with the best appearances. And that sucks. There is this somehow weird connection people make; “oh he speaks very well, he must be a good leader.” Such nonsense. You can only know if someone is a good leader by looking at his experience.
Comment by Administrator — December 7, 2006 @ 11:19 am
Leaders appointed by a court based on moral merit and academic achievement, limited by a constitution and a bill of rights with the electorate being able to vote on issues rather than personalities?
Of course, the courts would have to be comprised of androids.
Comment by Josef — December 7, 2006 @ 1:37 pm
“Democracy is bad because it does not bring forth the best leaders. It brings forth the best speakers with the best appearances. And that sucks. There is this somehow weird connection people make; “oh he speaks very well, he must be a good leader.” Such nonsense. You can only know if someone is a good leader by looking at his experience.”
Natural selection plays in here. If the people want a good speaker, they should get it, and tough luck for them. It got Germany Hitler.
I personally would prefer something like the ‘government’ in Snow Crash: where each small area has its own government. This makes sure that the leader is close by (and can easily be removed or changed). The only downside would be that no one can get anything done since a subdivision doesn’t have much money.
Comment by Dan Brokeau — December 8, 2006 @ 4:41 am