Amazon.com Widgets
  • Short-sighted, irresponsible, unqualified rule by popularity contest.

    Managing a country effectively takes an erudite knowledge base and a long-term perspective. The average voter is not qualified to manage a country. If they are not qualified to run a country, how can we expect them to vote in such a way as to maximize their net benefit? The fact is, without at least a basic understanding of human motivation, macro economics, political theory, human psychology, law, and cultural anthropology, their opinions are so ill-informed as to be valueless. Add to this the fact that successful and efficient management is a completely seperate slikkset from marketing (meaning that the people who are most likely to get into power often lack the skillset to wield it effectively), and that power is necessarily held ony for a term before it must be obtained again, and you have a recipe for a broken system where the nation rarely gets what it needs, corruption runs rampant, resources are spent inefficiently and ineffectively, and the focus is on immediate, high profile results in order to retain power after the next election rather than responsibe, sustainable governance and long-term solutions.

  • If the people were not ignorant, then we would not be ruled ignorantly.

    Democracy is the rule of the people - if the people are ignorant, then ignorance rules. I sympathise with the opposing opinions, because the people are, for the most part, grossly ignorant; however, they do not have to be, and so democracy cannot be said to be the rule of ignorance a priori.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.