Democracy among high IQ, low time preference, property owning males may be fine, but I'm afraid the slippery slope to unlimited democracy and its low time preference, communistic third worldism may be inevitable. It only took America about 200 years.
-
Show this thread
-
It's a little hard to reconcile "a government should maximize the outcomes for its people" with "government shouldn't listen to what people want", though, unless we say "people are too dumb to know what's good for them".
1 reply 2 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
Of course, people often are too dumb to know what's good for them, but that also doesn't mean all their preferences are invalid. A moderate position of "listen to what people want but realize they may not know what's good for them" is probably most reasonable.
2 replies 2 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
We could also say, "screw the people, just do what's best for the elites because in the long term what's best for the elites *is* what's best for the people" (ie "let's just replace the people with the elites, and we'll improve civilization").
1 reply 2 retweets 4 likesShow this thread
But I'm not sure that actually works out that well either. Probably results in too much conflict.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.