35 ms·

I have a very cynical view of democracy but it turns out that these days it makes me more optimistic about democracy. Democracy has never been about electing t

by Iv 9y ago

I have a very cynical view of democracy but it turns out that these days it makes me more optimistic about democracy. Democracy has never been about electing the brightest, never. Democracy is actually not at all about how we choose the person who will rule (as is demonstrated by US who elected twice this century someone who lose the popular vote). It is about the fact that in face of enough unpopularity, the current leader will be gone in less time it would take to overthrow them. The goal of democracy is not good governance, it is civil peace. When you look at it this way, from the outside, democracy is working perfectly well in the US. The big test will be to see if the next transition goes peacefully, impeachment or not. As far as systems go, the main competitor for the US system is the Chinese system, that is a meritocracy. Well, as imperfect a meritocracy as the US is a democracy, but looking at the diplomas of the leaders there, you will see far more scientists and less lawyers. For decades, it has managed to offer transitions and to evolve its dogmas. Xi Jinping's power grab offers a similar test than Trump's US. We shall see what happens at the next transition. We, democrats (in the non-US sense), do not thing that a power structure like the PCC can stay decent without counter powers and elections but the PCC's endurance and success at managing the biggest country in the world is to be acknowledged. Another system that could, unexpectedly, reappear and offer a competition is plain old absolute monarchy. I keep an eye on the kingdom of Saudi Arabia where the crown prince has decided to clean up some corruption and has (correctly, IMO) identified religious extremism to be the main reason his country lags behind. He has announced staunch reformism. It is yet to be seen if this will actually happen or if it just PR, but if it does, monarchies may come back in front of the scene too. All in all, as much as I love democracy, I am happy that we seem to stop being complacent about our imperfect systems and may finally seek improvements. I believe that democracy is the most advanced and workable system but it is not the easiest to manage and our societies and cultures still have a lot of room for improvement.

nopriorarrests 9y ago
>The goal of democracy is not good governance, it is civil peace. This is an excellent point. On the other hand, though, it was 8 years of GWB, which was resented by the half of the country, then it was 8 years of Obama, which was resented by another half, and now, well, things are definitely not improving. My point here is that it seems that democracy getting weaker and weaker for solving that civil peace part of equation. I often wonder, if the current situation is the lowest point, and politics will get more moderate from here. It should be, but then, so it was during GWB term...
- Iv 9y ago
  Half of the country hates the other half. It does not date from GWB. Some date it back to the civil war. If that is so, the US democracy has been remarkably effective at keeping peace.
fvdessen 9y ago
>The goal of democracy is not good governance, it is civil peace. It is neither. Democratic elections is a process that gives power to the politician whose plan / personality / promises appeals to the most people. In other words, it selects for the best propaganda. Which is why media personalities tend to be very successful at elections and why democracy looks very desirable. On the other hand, regarding good governance and civil peace, If you look at democracy in general, (and not just western countries), it is not that much better than alternatives. IMHO the current problem is that the values previously selected by the democratic process have been equated with the process itself, and now that they are falling out of fashion, it is democracy itself that looks like it's taking a hit.

by Iv 9y ago

nopriorarrests 9y ago

>The goal of democracy is not good governance, it is civil peace. This is an excellent point. On the other hand, though, it was 8 years of GWB, which was resented by the half of the country, then it was 8 years of Obama, which was resented by another half, and now, well, things are definitely not improving. My point here is that it seems that democracy getting weaker and weaker for solving that civil peace part of equation. I often wonder, if the current situation is the lowest point, and politics will get more moderate from here. It should be, but then, so it was during GWB term...

Iv 9y ago
Half of the country hates the other half. It does not date from GWB. Some date it back to the civil war. If that is so, the US democracy has been remarkably effective at keeping peace.

fvdessen 9y ago

>The goal of democracy is not good governance, it is civil peace. It is neither. Democratic elections is a process that gives power to the politician whose plan / personality / promises appeals to the most people. In other words, it selects for the best propaganda. Which is why media personalities tend to be very successful at elections and why democracy looks very desirable. On the other hand, regarding good governance and civil peace, If you look at democracy in general, (and not just western countries), it is not that much better than alternatives. IMHO the current problem is that the values previously selected by the democratic process have been equated with the process itself, and now that they are falling out of fashion, it is democracy itself that looks like it's taking a hit.