Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 2

The Folly of Democracy

Democracy alone is stupid. I don’t mean this as a baseless attack, or an angst


ridden, teen anarchist, war cry, I mean it in a very literal objective sense. In terms of
the actions of any democracy, the larger it is, the stupider it becomes. This is based
on a very simple idea. But first we must define our terms for the purposes of this
debate. First, Democracy: a way a running a state based on popularity. Secondly,
Stupid: of low intelligence, inaccurate, false, or unreasonable.

In order to agree with or counter this assessment one must attack or support the
following statements…

• Geniuses are rare, and by definition will always be in the minority.

• It is logical to prefer a genius as a leader over an average mind.

• If geniuses are a minority, and human breeding is exponential, then the ratio of
stupid individuals to geniuses in any society will increase with population. Given
that geniuses can produce average children even when paired.

• An average person is more likely to mislabel an average person a genius than a


genius is.

• Fair is not always desirable.

• Context controls meaning, and a genius sees more context than an average
mind, therefore a genius is more likely to see the underlore of any given situation
and thus is in a better position to make an accurate and ethical decision.

All these things considered, is democracy really a good idea? How distant is it
from the mob. I believe that government is mafia given legitimacy by duration.
Consider this; could lynching be construed as democratic, so long as the majority of
persons later ratified the action? How is our prison system not like lynching? Is it not
based on a hatred of certain behaviors or ideologies?

A majority of people can agree on an idea but that doesn’t make it just or
factual. Also, in order for democracy to be truly fair everyone affected by a given
decision should have a say in it, and conversely people not affected by a decision
shouldn’t have a say. Since we only allow some Americans to vote, and they only
comprise 5% of the global population anyway, is this really even a democracy at all
given the size of the American economy and its impact on the rest of the world? For
example Iraq didn’t vote for either Bush.

Democracy isn’t about egalitarianism; it’s about preventing a revolt.


Government systems do not strive to please the populace, they strive only to exist
and prevent the populace from getting angry and powerful enough to remove them.

We don’t even live in a Democracy. We are a defacto oligarchy, our rulers


being Time Warner, Wal-Mart, Disney, Catholicism, etc. There are so many facets of
American life that the majority would see abolished or altered if we lived in a true
democracy. Just look around, I’m sure you’ll see them. Obligatory car insurance for
example. A truly democratic government would encourage and discourage far more
often than force. But how is a truly democratic government different from emergent
consensus? It isn’t, therefore, democratic government is a misnomer. It’s
doublethink.

Democracy, it has been said, is based on the assumption that more than half
of the people are right about a given decision more than half the time. I personally
don’t see how that’s possible.