Ants aren't individual beings in the same sense that humans are -not by far!
No, Some factors need being pumped up at the expense of others: the more knowledge you have the more your vote should count -put simply.
The Sixth Extinction is happening right now.
- Thread starter trekkiedane
- Start date
What are you disagreeing with? You appear to be agreeing with me.
Exactly. Didn't I say it couldn't work for humans because we're different?
You both seem to be repeating my points but acting like you're arguing with me while you do it.
Not really... feudalism has everyone serving one's lord, not serving society. If the lord has everyone's best interest in mind, then sure.... but that's fairly unlikely. Unless you're part worm!
Of course Dune is fiction, but it illustrates one of the big problems with pretty much every form of government ever devised, including democracy... the inability for real long term planning which in many ways is the topic of this thread. Of course as long as people are involved, that's gonna be a problem!
Not at all, merely illustrating that agree on some points.
Who is going to be allowed to define "knowledge"? And how would you test for it?
Since you ask me.
Do you really think I would be our best 'expert' on this?
I don't know, dangnit, I'm just a joe-smo like the rest, you know, not a whatsmacallit!
But would it really be so difficult to find the, say, 50% best educated people amongst us?
I guess it depends on what one considers education. Who's more educated, someone who has a college degree and can program computers or a farmer who never went to school but knows how to deliver a calf, fix a tractor and predict the weather?
I don't think that there's any reasonable standard for what constitutes educated, which is why I disagree with your premise. In a democracy we all bring different skills and abilities to the table.
I don't think that there's any reasonable standard for what constitutes educated, which is why I disagree with your premise. In a democracy we all bring different skills and abilities to the table.
So, let's take the 50% most knowledgeable, those with knowledge in the most varied fields -as opposed to those that are experts in some narrow field.
^Your line of thinking is elitist and dangerous to the well-being of the species as a whole. Mallrory is correct. We all bring our different strengths to the table. Who are any of us to judge who's better than whom? That line of thinking can lead you down some despicable paths.
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
Yes, 3 Years and counting.
No, not all of us. Not even most of us, in many cases.
The problem with trekkiedane's position is not that it's elitist. All political systems are elitist, by their very nature--anyone who thinks otherwise is just kidding themselves.
Democracy's great virtue is that it allows for the peaceful circulation of elites. Basically, it's a gentleman's agreement among elite factions that they will compete peacefully for control of the state. Elections are bloodless revolutions, and politics are the continuation of war by other means.
The problem with trekkiedane's position is that governments need power to function. In basic terms, there are three types of power: force, authority, and influence. The government in a functioning democracy possesses a potent combination of authority and influence, derived from its popular mandate.
If you're going to get rid of democracy, you need some kind of alternative power base--and historically, the only alternative form of power available has been naked force. This means rule by warriors--whether medieval knights, or modern military dictators.
So, even if we could define who the 'knowledgeable' are, where are the knowledgeable going to get the power they need to rule over the ignorant?
john titor
Captain
I see a Malthusian crisis of epic proportions coming. Unsustainable population growth due to economic inequality, religion, the bad aftertaste of colonialism, etc its going to collapse like a stack of cards. We're too reliant on oil and while seems to be a general policy agreement to convert over to different resources again I see self interest messing things up. When it begins to run out international tensions will mount, elites will screw over the majority to ensure their survival, there will be wars. Environmental changes due to deforestation, the extinction of key species in the eco system, again famine and the scarcity of resources will make societies ever more desperate. If we, humans, continue to refuse to adopt a more sustainable way of life we are doomed. The economic crisis is just the beginning of a long hard tragic road ahead.
The problem is that Human Beings haven't been down from the trees for very long. Civilization and the Arts and Sciences have progressed at an unbelievable rate, but much of what the species does is still based on animal instincts. Just about every problem can be traced back to two things: Overpopulation and competition for territory and resources. We need to get to the point where reason overwhelms these instincts.
Democracy is the perfect form of government when it works. But to work it has to be a group of well-educated people governing themselves, not competing groups of ignorant and superstitious people hiring professional politicians to govern them.
Democracy is the perfect form of government when it works. But to work it has to be a group of well-educated people governing themselves, not competing groups of ignorant and superstitious people hiring professional politicians to govern them.
^Indeed.
The type of democracy we have today is a rich people's democracy: if you have enough money to back your candidate better than the opponents -or indeed buy your own TV network and make it into a propaganda machine- you can also rule the nation.
I'm suggesting that brains and education should weigh heavier than wallet size.
You say that as if it's a bad thing.
The type of democracy we have today is a rich people's democracy: if you have enough money to back your candidate better than the opponents -or indeed buy your own TV network and make it into a propaganda machine- you can also rule the nation.
I'm suggesting that brains and education should weigh heavier than wallet size.
I would point out that a similar line of thinking is the reason that the US is a representative democracy and not subject to a vote by everyone on every issue. On many issues, the masses ARE too ignorant to know what's good for them. Or at least, too ignorant of the facts are repercussions of actions to make a good judgement. People also can't be trusted to act in the greater interest if the alternative is to act in their own, even if in the long term the self interest of the whole would benefit the individual. Not that politicians are often a great degree better at it, but they quite often surround themselves with people who are.
People are concerned with their work, family and friends... and that's about it. They are not foreign policy experts or tax experts or war tacticians. Obviously some people are, but they shouldn't have a say when Joe Blow down the street doesn't. Make your feelings known you your elected officials, vote for someone you trust, that's about all you can do.
This I 100% agree with, however I think it would be nice if scientists and researchers had a bit more respect amongst certain public circles. Anti-intellectualism and "gut" feelings about complicated scientific discussions are not good for anyone.
Respect them? Hell, I count on them to get us out of the trouble we are in. That doesn't mean that scientists should be telling us what to do. It simply means they should respond scientifically to the public need. We should tell them what the demand is and they should supply it.
Is that right? Well, if that is the standard then I'm guessing that neither you or I would make the ultimate cut. I"m pretty smart and I'm sure you are too. Yet, there is always someone much smarter. There are plenty of people smarter than us that have big wallets. I guess we should just die and make room for them.^Indeed.
You say that as if it's a bad thing.
The type of democracy we have today is a rich people's democracy: if you have enough money to back your candidate better than the opponents -or indeed buy your own TV network and make it into a propaganda machine- you can also rule the nation.
I'm suggesting that brains and education should weigh heavier than wallet size.
Similar threads
