4 ms·

This is somewhat of a naive view -- the risks of any kind of dictatorship far outweigh any slight chance of good.

wenc 6y ago
I tend to agree -- it seems to me that democracy creates ecological conditions favorable to long-term survival, because the risk of destruction under dictatorship is asymmetric with respect to the probability of prosperity. Democratic checks-and-balances assume the inescapability of despotic buffoons who rise to power either through force or sometimes even through the people's choice (while it's good to believe in the wisdom of crowds, one must always account for its lapses). I think these are very realistic assumptions.
- leafboi 6y ago
  The problem is there's no definitive evidence that proves this yet.
bllguo 6y ago
Hand-waving things away with your absolutist statement is what truly seems naive. IMO there is far more nuance than you suggest. Democracy seems to work well for some types of problems but not others. What happens to democracies when faced with threats that manifest over very short timescales? They aren't nimble enough to respond in time. This is most evident in larger democracies; look at US/India responses to COVID. Countries like Taiwan are democratic and still succeeded, but they are small and they utilized methods that would be characterized as authoritarian here in the US. What about problems where the consequences of decisions have a large time-lag? There is no incentive for democratic policymakers to address them. Global warming is the obvious example. I question whether democracies can handle these kinds of issues. More worryingly, I think that as humanity's capabilities continue to increase, these kinds of problems are going to be more and more frequent.
- threeseed 6y ago
  Countries like Australia, South Korea and New Zealand have had exemplary COVID-19 responses. It has nothing to do with whether you are a democracy or not and everything to do with the competence of the government. And the people of the US will have an opportunity to vote in a few months on whether the response was adequate or not. I don't see the people of China having a similar opportunity for example.
  - nradov 6y ago
    Did you consider it an exemplary response when Australian police arrested a pregnant woman for attempting to protest lockdown measures? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824
    - threeseed 6y ago
      I live in Melbourne and her arrest is widely supported. Our city is in a severe lockdown and at a tipping point between New Zealand style suppression and US style chaos. Just because she is a white, pregnant woman does not mean that she has the right to break the law and compromise the safety of the community.
      - stagehn 6y ago
        What does her being white have to do with anything and why would you even bring up her race?
        rbg246 6y ago
        Because the reaction to her arrest is a good example of white lady in distress. Whether you agree or disagree with her arrest and release like two hours after this sort of stuff happens all the time with police but it's a big deal if it's a white lady. Just for the record im not sure I agree with her arrest but you know... Bigger things to worry about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  Covid-19 has harmed fewer people worldwide than the Chinese government has murdered of its own citizen.
- hellofunk 6y ago
  One thing about a democracy, if poor choices are made and poor leaders are selected, it’s only temporary until the next wave of elections. But in a dictatorship, or even something that masquerades as a democracy but is not, those choices may go unchecked for decades.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > One thing about a democracy, if poor choices are made and poor leaders are selected, it’s only temporary until the next wave of elections. With sufficiently bad choices in a democracy it ceases to be a democracy before the error is corrected. Also, even when that doesn't happen, its possible for a choice to be bad but repeated in a democracy.
    - hellofunk 6y ago
      > With sufficiently bad choices in a democracy it ceases to be a democracy before the error is corrected. I’d like to see a real world example of what you mean. Because while lots of countries have elections, when leaders are allowed to arbitrarily extend their reign past with their laws allow, then I would agree with you. But those are the countries that I consider falling under the category of “masquerading as a democracy“.
      - chillacy 6y ago
        That seems a bit tautological to include the outcome in the definition. By that logic there are democracies today that will sometime in the future become “masquerading” that we can’t know yet.
        hellofunk 6y ago
        You can't predict the future of any country of course, but you can certainly use its past to inform such a distinction. The moves by China and Russia, for example, to lengthen the reign of their leaders, while in the U.S., no matter what has happened to its leadership for the entirety of its history, no one has ever exceeded the time they were allowed before another election risked that tenure.

wenc 6y ago

I tend to agree -- it seems to me that democracy creates ecological conditions favorable to long-term survival, because the risk of destruction under dictatorship is asymmetric with respect to the probability of prosperity. Democratic checks-and-balances assume the inescapability of despotic buffoons who rise to power either through force or sometimes even through the people's choice (while it's good to believe in the wisdom of crowds, one must always account for its lapses). I think these are very realistic assumptions.

leafboi 6y ago
The problem is there's no definitive evidence that proves this yet.

bllguo 6y ago

Hand-waving things away with your absolutist statement is what truly seems naive. IMO there is far more nuance than you suggest. Democracy seems to work well for some types of problems but not others. What happens to democracies when faced with threats that manifest over very short timescales? They aren't nimble enough to respond in time. This is most evident in larger democracies; look at US/India responses to COVID. Countries like Taiwan are democratic and still succeeded, but they are small and they utilized methods that would be characterized as authoritarian here in the US. What about problems where the consequences of decisions have a large time-lag? There is no incentive for democratic policymakers to address them. Global warming is the obvious example. I question whether democracies can handle these kinds of issues. More worryingly, I think that as humanity's capabilities continue to increase, these kinds of problems are going to be more and more frequent.

threeseed 6y ago
Countries like Australia, South Korea and New Zealand have had exemplary COVID-19 responses. It has nothing to do with whether you are a democracy or not and everything to do with the competence of the government. And the people of the US will have an opportunity to vote in a few months on whether the response was adequate or not. I don't see the people of China having a similar opportunity for example.
- nradov 6y ago
  Did you consider it an exemplary response when Australian police arrested a pregnant woman for attempting to protest lockdown measures? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824
  - threeseed 6y ago
    I live in Melbourne and her arrest is widely supported. Our city is in a severe lockdown and at a tipping point between New Zealand style suppression and US style chaos. Just because she is a white, pregnant woman does not mean that she has the right to break the law and compromise the safety of the community.
    - stagehn 6y ago
      What does her being white have to do with anything and why would you even bring up her race?
      - rbg246 6y ago
        Because the reaction to her arrest is a good example of white lady in distress. Whether you agree or disagree with her arrest and release like two hours after this sort of stuff happens all the time with police but it's a big deal if it's a white lady. Just for the record im not sure I agree with her arrest but you know... Bigger things to worry about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome
srtjstjsj 6y ago
Covid-19 has harmed fewer people worldwide than the Chinese government has murdered of its own citizen.
hellofunk 6y ago
One thing about a democracy, if poor choices are made and poor leaders are selected, it’s only temporary until the next wave of elections. But in a dictatorship, or even something that masquerades as a democracy but is not, those choices may go unchecked for decades.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > One thing about a democracy, if poor choices are made and poor leaders are selected, it’s only temporary until the next wave of elections. With sufficiently bad choices in a democracy it ceases to be a democracy before the error is corrected. Also, even when that doesn't happen, its possible for a choice to be bad but repeated in a democracy.
  - hellofunk 6y ago
    > With sufficiently bad choices in a democracy it ceases to be a democracy before the error is corrected. I’d like to see a real world example of what you mean. Because while lots of countries have elections, when leaders are allowed to arbitrarily extend their reign past with their laws allow, then I would agree with you. But those are the countries that I consider falling under the category of “masquerading as a democracy“.
    - chillacy 6y ago
      That seems a bit tautological to include the outcome in the definition. By that logic there are democracies today that will sometime in the future become “masquerading” that we can’t know yet.
      - hellofunk 6y ago
        You can't predict the future of any country of course, but you can certainly use its past to inform such a distinction. The moves by China and Russia, for example, to lengthen the reign of their leaders, while in the U.S., no matter what has happened to its leadership for the entirety of its history, no one has ever exceeded the time they were allowed before another election risked that tenure.