Comment by hayst4ck

Comment by hayst4ck 9 days ago

That's false. Everything comes down to good leadership. Monarchies with good leadership very well might have incredibly effective anti-corruption techniques and competency. China is managing a billion people and their infrastructure and tech is incredible.

The problems are two fold. The first is vetoing of bad ideas. No leader is right 100% of the time, and when they are wrong, someone must have the power to veto. There must be some way for reason to triumph over power, and a leader who chooses to be responsible is capable of deferring to expertise.

The second is succession. A good leader today may be succeeded by rotten leader tomorrow, but both have the same legitimacy, because the legitimacy comes from power alone and not reason.

> effective, competent, just, or free of corruption.

These things are a result of culture, not a result of the government itself. The government influences culture, but they are first and foremost functions of culture, specifically a culture of tolerating speaking truth to power, dissent, critical thinking, tolerance, and solidarity.

hnhg 8 days ago

I think people get confused into thinking that democracy is about voting when it is should be about reducing prolonged concentrations of power, because of the innate tendency for it to be abused and hoarded. So to support your point, if your culture does not support the concept of good "democratic" governance, and no one strives for the institutions and constitutions to support it, you might be better off with a benevolent dictator, for as long as they last before a not-so-benevolent one.

Reply View 5 replies

hayst4ck 8 days ago

Timothy Snyder would encapsulate this idea as "Democracy is not something you are, but something you do."
Which makes a lot of sense if you say the same thing about Christianity. Christian isn't something you are, Christianity is something you do.
Both have hallowed dogmas that are poorly understood by their followers, the constitution and the bible/teachings of jesus respectively.

Reply View | 0 replies
mmooss 7 days ago

> I think people get confused into thinking that democracy is about voting when it is should be about reducing prolonged concentrations of power
Voting is the definition and core mechanism of democracy: Government by the consent of the governed, to protect their rights, their lives, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
What's bizarre is, probably in a place where you have the benefits of centuries of overwhelming success, your extreme attempts to redefine it.
cui bono?, other than dictators. What has worked better than democracy?
> if your culture does not support the concept of good "democratic" governance, and no one strives for the institutions and constitutions to support it, you might be better off with a benevolent dictator, for as long as they last before a not-so-benevolent one.
Which culture? Democracy has been an incredible success all over the world - unprecedented success in history in most places it's taken hold.
Yours are the old propaganda of dictators - our 'culture', that undefined nonsense people cite for their prejudices, isn't compatible. The question is, why do you take up their cause?
They also love that you are sitting on the sidelines distracted, criticizing, rather than acting as a democratic citizen.

Reply View | 0 replies
yyyk 8 days ago

Democracy and elections are not opinion polls. It's a distribution of political power.

Reply View | 2 replies
- hayst4ck 8 days ago
  
  That's true but it's not usefully true.
  Even avoiding things like gerrymandering, are voters choosing politicians or are politicians choosing voters?
  Do candidates send out emails asking for you to talk to your friends, or do they ask for more money? Do candidates have principled stances founded on an underlying philosophy, or do they focus on issues that are emotional in order to drum up support.
  I think "why do candidates ask for money" is a very very important question to ruminate on as is "why are we talking about abortion and race rather than health and housing"?
  Before a general election there is a primary and before a primary there is fundraising. In order to succeed in a primary, in general, you have to do OK at fundraising. Fundraising is not dissimilar to an election and it happens before primaries. This means money votes first, which is why it feels like we have a "democracy" approved of by those with money, we literally do.
  Money votes first.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  mmooss 7 days ago
  
  It's very imperfect - like every human institution ever - but still democracy has enormous power. Why do you think so many invest so much trying to manipulate voters? What are they spending the money on?
  Also, fundraising is a signal of democratic appeal. Some fundraise with mass collections of smaller donations.
  Still, I agree that money has too much influence. So what do you think, as a democratic citizen, should we do about the influence of money? It's our country. The moneyed influences love that you are distracted, on the sidelines, debating rather than acting.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

mmooss 7 days ago

> That's false. Everything comes down to good leadership. Monarchies with good leadership very well might have incredibly effective anti-corruption techniques and competency. China is managing a billion people and their infrastructure and tech is incredible.

Can you name a monarchy that is nearly as free, safe, and prosperous as advanced democracies? That is less corrupt? Is China? (No.)

> These things are a result of culture, not a result of the government itself.

How do you explain all the cultures around the world with successful democracies that meet my descriptions? How about Taiwan and (formerly) Hong Kong - same cultures as communist China, far more free, prosperous, non-corrupt, safe ....

There is also the issue of rights. What right does someone have to rule me without my consent? Who the heck are they, other than thugs with guns?

Reply View 2 replies

defrost 7 days ago

> Can you name a monarchy that is nearly as free, safe, and prosperous as advanced democracies?
Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom.
Andorra, Belgium, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and Sweden.
Liechtenstein and Monaco.

Reply View | 1 reply
- mmooss 6 days ago
  
  As you have listed advanced democracies with figurehead relics of monarchy, we agree!
  
  Reply View | 0 replies