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
-
Replying to @HbdNrx
I still think democracy is the best system and I find the reasons given by people as to why non-democratic systems are better to be unconvincing. First, it is much easier to remove a bad democratic government. If you think people are too passive to vote their way out of current
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
problems, then you should not be creating even more barriers for them to act. Imagine a dictatorship determined to replace its population with Somalis. Second, taking a negative view of human nature makes democracy more and no less attractive. Why would you trust so few humans
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
with such power? Decentralization and distribution are the better way to prevent abuses. Third, people continue to say that in an undemocratic system, including one where government is passed as inheritance, elites have more incentive to do better. How? They have no competition.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
Fourth, assuming that there are no perfect moral preferences and that policies are about trade-offs, which are reasonable assumptions, the disfranchisement of some people just means that some people will have their interests and preferences ignored, and not that their optimal
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
outcome will be chosen for them. Think of how all the successes of nationalists were only made possible by the working class vote, and if the upper classes had all the political power, no resistance against the disease of our age would have had the slightest hope of being formed.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
Fifth, you can not be confident that your elite will be sane, and while you also can not be confident that your population will be sane, at least in a democracy you get to make the case for sanity. Sixth, elites already possess disproportionate power in a democracy where there is
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20 @HbdNrx
plenty of room to shape public opinion. Much of the dissatisfaction with current democratic decisions are complaints against elites. Giving them more power does not seem prudent.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FreeSoil20
I think most of the problems of democracy would go away if we limited voting in various ways eg IQ, but that appears to be unstable. As for unlimited democracy vs. other options, I'll just try to avoid picking anything as definitively better.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
But right now I'd go for a Trump monarchy
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.