I'm sorry you feel that I ignored it. I think I've read it every time you've posted it.Hermit wrote: ↑Wed Nov 04, 2020 5:49 pmWell, yes, democratically derived decisions can be horrifically stupid. Ignoring the fact that Trump won in 2016 despite trailing by almost 3 million votes, and is currently trailing by a similar amount, the size of the popular support he keeps getting is certainly not something one could cite in favour of democracy.Sean Hayden wrote: ↑Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:26 pm--fair enough, I guess.Hermit wrote: ↑Wed Nov 04, 2020 7:15 amDon't worry. If Trump gets another term he'll have whatever semblance of democracy there is in the USA binned before the end of 2024. You'll love the coming dynasty, the unbridled nepotism and corruption to come. You better. There's nothing you can do to prevent it. But there's a bright side to it: You'll no longer have to deal with that odious form of government any more - democracy.Sean Hayden wrote: ↑Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:53 am...and what's with all the praise of democracy I'm seeing? Bunch of sickos.
But what I find so depressing is all the smiling faces, glowing with pride at the democratic participation regardless of outcome. Talk about an own goal for the participation graders...
That said, I'll just repeat the Churchill quote I posted in reply to one of your missives three days ago (and which you ignored): "democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" That, to me, is pretty much the bottom line when it comes to any discussion about forms of government.
I just figure the points I've raised have said more than might be gained by addressing the quote itself. 
--//--
I've found a book which may have been written by a kindred spirit: Against Democracy
Most people believe democracy is a uniquely just form of government. They believe people have the right to an equal share of political power. And they believe that political participation is good for us―it empowers us, helps us get what we want, and tends to make us smarter, more virtuous, and more caring for one another. These are some of our most cherished ideas about democracy. But Jason Brennan says they are all wrong.
In this trenchant book, Brennan argues that democracy should be judged by its results―and the results are not good enough. Just as defendants have a right to a fair trial, citizens have a right to competent government. But democracy is the rule of the ignorant and the irrational, and it all too often falls short. Furthermore, no one has a fundamental right to any share of political power, and exercising political power does most of us little good. On the contrary, a wide range of social science research shows that political participation and democratic deliberation actually tend to make people worse―more irrational, biased, and mean. Given this grim picture, Brennan argues that a new system of government―epistocracy, the rule of the knowledgeable―may be better than democracy, and that it's time to experiment and find out.
A challenging critique of democracy and the first sustained defense of the rule of the knowledgeable, Against Democracy is essential reading for scholars and students of politics across the disciplines.
Featuring a new preface that situates the book within the current political climate and discusses other alternatives beyond epistocracy, Against Democracy is a challenging critique of democracy and the first sustained defense of the rule of the knowledgeable.
I'll have to check it out. I'm unlikely to agree with his recommendation given that I don't think simply restricting who can vote is going to be the solution. But it will be interesting to see if he has some original critiques and evidence.
