3 ms·

democracy is bad but its still better than more autocratic systems because it encourages change which keeps succession well-oiled and also acts as a vent for ty

democracy is bad but its still better than more autocratic systems because it encourages change which keeps succession well-oiled and also acts as a vent for tyranny to curtail its worst excesses. This applies as much to politics as it does a school board.

rfrey 2y ago
Having judges and university trustees hired on merit rather than campaigning to be elected does not make a system autocratic.
- brokeAstronomer 2y ago
  Being super rich != merit. This is what seems to be happening in practice.
- judahmeek 2y ago
  What better merit is there than public approval for positions like that?
  - vkou 2y ago
    If you ask five people who can't speak French to tell me which French-language essay deserves a higher grade, you'll quickly discover that their merit-finding abilities are a coin flip. The whole purpose of elections is tangential to merit. There's important reasons to have them, but finding the 'best' candidate isn't one of them.
- mmooss 2y ago
  Who chooses them? What makes you think they choose them on merit?
  - LtWorf 2y ago
    It's the whole theological foundation of northern european and american protestantism = being rich means good loves you, so you're a good person. How they got there from jesus saying rich people can't go to heaven is one of those theological acrobacies they criticise so much in catholics, but don't disregard doing themselves when suits them.
School-Cotton 2y ago
Democracy doesn’t entail having tons of minor roles being elected. That’s actually completely unique to the US, as far as I know. A lot of the positions that are elected in the US would be neutral civil servants in any other democratic country I can think of.
- Spivak 2y ago
  > neutral civil servants Look I'm not saying we don't have these but the set of positions that are neutral is much smaller. Thanks to the political whipping boys de jour any position of power within academic or educational institutions has become politicized.
mmooss 2y ago
It also ensures that many people, including people others don't like and dismiss, get a voice and some real power.

rfrey 2y ago

Having judges and university trustees hired on merit rather than campaigning to be elected does not make a system autocratic.

brokeAstronomer 2y ago
Being super rich != merit. This is what seems to be happening in practice.
judahmeek 2y ago
What better merit is there than public approval for positions like that?
- vkou 2y ago
  If you ask five people who can't speak French to tell me which French-language essay deserves a higher grade, you'll quickly discover that their merit-finding abilities are a coin flip. The whole purpose of elections is tangential to merit. There's important reasons to have them, but finding the 'best' candidate isn't one of them.
mmooss 2y ago
Who chooses them? What makes you think they choose them on merit?
- LtWorf 2y ago
  It's the whole theological foundation of northern european and american protestantism = being rich means good loves you, so you're a good person. How they got there from jesus saying rich people can't go to heaven is one of those theological acrobacies they criticise so much in catholics, but don't disregard doing themselves when suits them.

School-Cotton 2y ago

Democracy doesn’t entail having tons of minor roles being elected. That’s actually completely unique to the US, as far as I know. A lot of the positions that are elected in the US would be neutral civil servants in any other democratic country I can think of.

Spivak 2y ago
> neutral civil servants Look I'm not saying we don't have these but the set of positions that are neutral is much smaller. Thanks to the political whipping boys de jour any position of power within academic or educational institutions has become politicized.

mmooss 2y ago

It also ensures that many people, including people others don't like and dismiss, get a voice and some real power.