3 ms·
The basic idea is that the will of the people may change at a whim, and that we therefore need safeguards to protect liberal parlamentarism and the basic order
by ahje 8y ago
The basic idea is that the will of the people may change at a whim, and that we therefore need safeguards to protect liberal parlamentarism and the basic order of society from changes that would otherwise be disruptive. This obviously protects the so-called elites from angry mobs, which is the main argument against this system, but it also make sure that our economies don't collapse due to various governments doing things like forced take-overs of international banks in times of financial unrest.
Alas, this order is often defended in the name of "democracy" when it's outright anti-democratic and patronizing.
- vtesucks 8y agoThanks, fair point. But then again that's democracy right? And riots aren't your weekend party- people are on streets because they are fed up of something.
- ahje 8y agoDefinitely. On the other hand, would this have been prevented if the desiscion to increase carbon taxes was taken through a referendum? I suspect many of the people that are currently rioting would do so even if the no-side had lost a referendum, especially if they are stuck in filter bubbles reinforcing the idea that everyone around them share their opinions. That's also the point of the article, but the author blames it all on Facebook not preventing populist bubbles, when the main issue is that the entire industry has a problem with bubbles.