yarvin thinks democracy is “done” because it’s inefficient, controlled by elites, and fails to deliver real results. he argues that politicians aren’t accountab

yarvin thinks democracy is “done” because it’s inefficient, controlled by elites, and fails to deliver real results. he argues that politicians aren’t accountable and power is more symbolic than effective. he believes a strong, centralized leader (like a monarch or CEO) could better address societal issues than the current democratic system. basically, he sees democracy as broken and unable to solve modern problems. our democracy is definitely broken in many problematic ways, but the entirety of history has shown that centralizing power to a single person or group of people has disastrous outcomes. inefficiency is the trade-off we make for meaningful representation. the lack of representation and accountability would be addressed really well with a few changes, like campaign finance reform, ranked choice voting, and a greater overall society-level class consciousness. i think if more people realized that the class struggle is responsible for most of their problems instead of whatever the boogeyman of the day is, they would vote much more aligned to their own self interest. until then we'll have billionaires buying the entirety of corporate news to manipulate and distort the main avenue of information, and spend billions on elections and advertising to inject as much misleading us-vs-them propaganda as possible, and have a two-party system that refuses to get anything done unless it's to their own selfish benefit