> People are too stupid and greedy to stay true to the ideals of any political system for more than a few years.
> 95% of people are too uninformed to have a coherent opinion about any kind of public policy. Sexy Jane the Health Sciences major should not have a say in international diplomacy.
> The other 5% of people are only informed in certain areas and may have a coherent opinion on one or two aspects of public policy at most.
> The success of a group is primarily determined by the ability of the ruler to enforce his ideology, and is not very dependent the actual ideology itself.
> The most pure form of government is traditional centralized, authoritarian systems like oligarchy or theocracy, because those are the ones that best enable a ruler to enforce his ideology.
Other types of government will either be overthrown or degenerate into something that is in effect centralized and authoritarian.
Are these stupid opinions? Is there a name for them?
Being an edgy elitist faggot.
>>851203
Fascism.
Sounds like some arrogant elitist nonsense only someone retarded enough to think they're part of that super special 5% would evince.
The average person in general is unfit to vote.
They have no clue about liberty, law, foreign policy, matters of security, war, defence, public finances etc.
That is why when democracy was introduced only rich (thus statistically more intelligent), land owning (thus had a stake in the country) men were allowed to vote.
Thats why I like to live and work central London, dont have to deal with everyday idiots.
Sound elitist? I dont care, I was born poor live half my life poor, and frankly feel very little sympathy for the poor.
>>851254
The pretension oozing out of this post is liable to suffocate me.
>>851268
What does he have a pretense to? He's an elitist ass, but pretension means something different.
>>851287
The pretense is that he thinks he is exceptional enough to be 'fit to vote" and has a clue about a litany of complicated topics that other people totally don't get, because he's special.
Also, fuck off, you autistic pedant.
>>851209
>>851234
I'm OP. I really don't think I'm being elitist. Just because you aren't in charge of public policy doesn't mean you are worthless to society, it just means you're not writing the rules. I don't think I'm in the 5% nor do I have any desire to be, and am sure most people would have no interest in it. I want to be an engineer, not a legislator.
Maybe most people should have a say in social issues on a local level. Everyone kind of has firsthand experience with that. But other types of decisions can get pretty arcane.
No one person is genius enough to understand all the intricacies of radically different fields like economics, diplomacy, business law, medical law, etc etc etc. Maybe you can understand 1 or 2 if you study really hard.
>>851358
>No one person is genius enough to understand all the intricacies of radically different fields like economics, diplomacy, business law, medical law, etc etc etc.
Isn't that an argument against dictatorship?
>>851203
Patrician.
>>851203
>95% of people are too uninformed to have a coherent opinion about any kind of public policy
That doesn't even matter considering that people in the United States barely vote anyways. In the United States today any nuanced introspection of the political process in State, Federal, and Municipal government will reveal that the vast majority of the people do not vote, and are not a part of the decision making process in any meaningful way. Beyond the necessary political showmanship and bullshit needed to get re-elected, government today operates according to the will of the political leadership, institutional norms, and persistent and or powerful outside lobbying interests. The ideals of communitarian society died long ago and when you consider the power legislative speakers and committee leaders have in determining the survival of bills, the reality of our political situation becomes quite clear.
>>851203
Technocracy with absolutist undertones.
I agree somewhat. Pure democracy is civilization suicide, but people are going to want some say, you'll need to give them something. Maybe everyone can earn the right to vote through a technical test.
What about an absolute ruler sounds good to you? A country needs an executive position, but absolute power can be dangerous as fuark
>>851358
You should read up on the positivism of the early 20th century, because that is essentially what you're advocating for.
>>851339
Glad to be of service :^))
>>851375
Yes. Oligarchy in this case might look something like an alliance of guilds.
>>851399
Not OP
I disagree that low voter turnout renders the voting question moot. When large swaths of the electorate don't vote politicians will throw out political hail Marys to mobilize untapped demographics. it can make politicians jump to some crazy extremes
Plus, people vote less when suffrage becomes extended. People vote when they think its important and their opinions matter. I'd rather we have a couple different paths to take to earn the vote, maybe a very difficult technical test or property requirement.
>>851203
puberty
>>851203
Sounds like Oligarchic Geniocracy maybe?
The evidence of the last hundred years is - Liberal democracies have proven themselves as the most stable form of government. Benevolent dictatorships are much more effective and greater, but for every good ruler, you get 10 awful rulers, and democracy has proven itself the best at keeping peace in pluralistic societies, the best at representing the interests, the best at avoiding wars, generating long term prosperity, and a large part of that is because the legitimacy of the government is clear to all, as it gets it from the consent of the governed.
Liberal democracies are not perfect and clearly have their downsides, as evidenced by the farce the current US Presidential election has turned into with Trump lowering it to a clown circus, but they are better than anything else tried so far. I know I'd much rather live in corrupt inept democracies like Brazil and the United States than countries like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, etc.
>>851459
>I'd much rather live in corrupt inept democracies countries like Russia
but... Russia is just a corrupt inept democracy.
>>851487
You have a point although I'm sure many would argue it is an autocracy, but I'll just rescind that example since it's contested.
But again I think it demonstrates the power of liberal democracies that most autocratic regimes feel obliged to pay lip service to democracy, even if it's a sham elections or just empty rhetoric about enacting the will of the people.
>>851459
Also I'm going to amend that liberal democracies only seem to avoid wars with other liberal democracies, and it's no an absolute, just a general trend
>OP says the truth
>thread full of asspained replies
No surprise.
>>851203
Just cynicism, pessimism, fatalism, those sorts of "isms".
>>851899
realism, pragmatism...
>>851234
Almost nobody who says this sort of thing ever wants to be in the 5%. The dream is to be the humble peasant living the good life, not the ruler.
We need an group that actually likes humanity pulling the strings from behind all the world governments.
Centralized authoritarian systems will always fail in the long run because rebellion and ambition become stronger the more they're suppressed. There needs to be a distributed "authoritarian" government that only exercises its power by nudging the general direction of humankind, while letting the wheels of lower social structures turn in order to release the pressures created by human nature.
>>851891
Marc Aurelius for all his virtue appointed his sociopathic son as his heir. Rome had many more good consuls than it had good emperors.
Republics are hard to establish but once established they generally result is stable competent leadership.
I believe that one is called 'edgy contrarian /pol/ackism'.
It's very common among 20 something year olds who still live in their mom's basement
>>852305
Aristocratic republic or a monarchy with strong noble class.
>>852645
>muh ad hominems
Don't forget fedoras, neckbeards and virginity, faggotron.
>>851203
Normal young male adult ideas, not really much else to say. Its all wrong, its black and white strong teenage opinions not yet battered to shit by what life throws at you as an adult. The idea that they teenager has "the knowledge", they know the secret to all existence that no one else has realised yet, their system is the one that would work if only everyone would listen. The worst thing is you have to go through this, you have to just believe all this bullshit until your brain has grown the bits that replace it and then start to prune away the ridiculous ideas of your kid brain so you can operate at full speed.
Look up human brain development, how teenagers brains differ from adults and something called second adulthood and some of you might get ahead of the game slightly, but thats all you can do as you cant make your actual anatomical brain grow faster.
>>852880
An overarching government doesn't work if it's obvious, though.
A global shadow government that very subtly exerts influence from backstage is the way to go.
