4 ms·

And you don't think that the United States has a similar elite? Successful societies have a leadership class that is based of some type of non-hereditary merit

And you don't think that the United States has a similar elite? Successful societies have a leadership class that is based of some type of non-hereditary merit : for example wealth, education or intelligence. A lot of unsuccessful societies happen when power is seized by someone who does not come from this leadership class. America has its leadership colleges and power families, same as france and a lot of western countries. You don't call it a political party, but it is. Look at singapore, malaysia, botswana - what do they have in common in terms of leadership? What has been the result? It's easy to accept what they tell you about democracy without really thinking about it. But actually consider the REAL systems of successful societies. They are not democratic.

plinkplonk 17y ago
"America has its leadership colleges and power families, same as france and a lot of western countries. You don't call it a political party, but it is." You have strange definitions of "political party" ;-). "Look at singapore, malaysia, botswana - what do they have in common in terms of leadership? " Are you trolling? All of these leaders are elected in democratic elections. Singapore is a somewhat borderline case and comes closest to a dictatorship in terms of restrictions on citizens, but it is still a long way away from the Communist dictatorship of China. I doubt Singaporeans are regularly killed for political dissent. No one argues against having good leaders (educated, visionary etc) as long as the governed people can decide what exactly is "good leadership", hold their leaders accountable and remove them from power peacefully if they think the leadership is corrupt/inefffective etc. For this you need the ability for a citizen to express an opinion without fear of being killed or imprisoned.
- maxklein 17y ago
  I dare you to remove Obama. I dare you and a thousand of your friends to remove Obama. You can't. Your voice is useless. In the elite system, let's say there are 1000 people who belong to this elite class. If 10 of them start agitating against the leader, then their problem will immediately be heard. Each of those 1000 people has a circle of people around then, the second class of elites, who can get a message to them. In this system, if you want to lead, you only need to get into the upper circle, you don't need to do the completely impossible step of being elected. If chinese leadership were corrupt, then they will be immediately removed by the large number of intelligent people who are in the upper part of the party. Those countries I listed all have a similar system, and power is handed from one member of this elite ruling class to the next - strangers or opposition don't jump in and take over power. Yes, there is democracy, but there is no chance of someone not in the system getting into the class. Yes, what I'm advocating here is the complete opposite of everything you have been brought up to believe - but the difference between me and you is that I think about even the things you are supposed to accept. Democracy is good - whoever would think to question that? You should. Question everything, even the things you think are obvious. To truly understand, you need to believe in what is wrong for a while. Only then can you understand both extremes of force and see where the truth lies.
  - plinkplonk 17y ago
    "To truly understand, you need to believe in what is wrong for a while." Ahh Belief preceeds understanding. First believe then understand. Sounds like some religious cult. I have nothing more to say to you sir. Good Day!
    - maxklein 17y ago
      This is the problem with modern thinking. You don't realise that in order to know your enemy, you have to be your enemy.
ytinas 17y ago
I could see your point of view for the most part until this post. You think there are some people fated to be in the "leading" class and we need to just let them lead? Personally, I question the need for government at all, but above all I find one must be practical. What works... works. I think a real, advanced anarchist system has never been allowed to be tried (for obvious reasons) but without testing it I'm not convinced it couldn't work. I certainly don't approve of a people who have, frankly, produced a pretty awful system condemning someone else who also has an awful system (which has a different set of plus and minus points).

plinkplonk 17y ago

"America has its leadership colleges and power families, same as france and a lot of western countries. You don't call it a political party, but it is." You have strange definitions of "political party" ;-). "Look at singapore, malaysia, botswana - what do they have in common in terms of leadership? " Are you trolling? All of these leaders are elected in democratic elections. Singapore is a somewhat borderline case and comes closest to a dictatorship in terms of restrictions on citizens, but it is still a long way away from the Communist dictatorship of China. I doubt Singaporeans are regularly killed for political dissent. No one argues against having good leaders (educated, visionary etc) as long as the governed people can decide what exactly is "good leadership", hold their leaders accountable and remove them from power peacefully if they think the leadership is corrupt/inefffective etc. For this you need the ability for a citizen to express an opinion without fear of being killed or imprisoned.

maxklein 17y ago
I dare you to remove Obama. I dare you and a thousand of your friends to remove Obama. You can't. Your voice is useless. In the elite system, let's say there are 1000 people who belong to this elite class. If 10 of them start agitating against the leader, then their problem will immediately be heard. Each of those 1000 people has a circle of people around then, the second class of elites, who can get a message to them. In this system, if you want to lead, you only need to get into the upper circle, you don't need to do the completely impossible step of being elected. If chinese leadership were corrupt, then they will be immediately removed by the large number of intelligent people who are in the upper part of the party. Those countries I listed all have a similar system, and power is handed from one member of this elite ruling class to the next - strangers or opposition don't jump in and take over power. Yes, there is democracy, but there is no chance of someone not in the system getting into the class. Yes, what I'm advocating here is the complete opposite of everything you have been brought up to believe - but the difference between me and you is that I think about even the things you are supposed to accept. Democracy is good - whoever would think to question that? You should. Question everything, even the things you think are obvious. To truly understand, you need to believe in what is wrong for a while. Only then can you understand both extremes of force and see where the truth lies.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "To truly understand, you need to believe in what is wrong for a while." Ahh Belief preceeds understanding. First believe then understand. Sounds like some religious cult. I have nothing more to say to you sir. Good Day!
  - maxklein 17y ago
    This is the problem with modern thinking. You don't realise that in order to know your enemy, you have to be your enemy.

ytinas 17y ago

I could see your point of view for the most part until this post. You think there are some people fated to be in the "leading" class and we need to just let them lead? Personally, I question the need for government at all, but above all I find one must be practical. What works... works. I think a real, advanced anarchist system has never been allowed to be tried (for obvious reasons) but without testing it I'm not convinced it couldn't work. I certainly don't approve of a people who have, frankly, produced a pretty awful system condemning someone else who also has an awful system (which has a different set of plus and minus points).