[FoRK] Democracy not Democrazy, was: Re: When Democracy Failed (Why ESR is an "anarchist")
Stephen D. Williams
sdw at lig.net
Thu Jun 24 20:02:38 PDT 2010
On 6/24/10 2:03 PM, Jeff Bone wrote:
> Excellent points.
That essay seems very shallow: It is certainly good to point out that
the public voted in and endorsed all the precursors. It is weak to
disqualify a political system that has clearly worked better than most
since inception because another, even if based on the first, fails to
remain sane. The German people of that period, and especially in the
Bavarian area where the Nazi party took off, were hyper-religious, still
traumatized by WWI, and clearly not stable or sane by any measure.
Easily manipulated and prone to group think and social coercion, they
went for anything. They are the classic case for the need for a culture
to be strongly individual, suspicious, and diverse.
The US has certainly had pockets of such group think, such as lynchings
in the South. And we certainly had some mildly scary
reminiscent-of-Nazi-like precursors during the Bush years.
The difference that makes a difference is having enough cultural and
legal features and strengths, first amendment etc., to make an actual
failure unlikely to happen or grow. Which isn't to say that you don't
wonder about some regions some of the time.
A well-designed form of government isn't enough to magically create
stability and correct operation. You need a well educated and sane
population. Eventually, even one that isn't will gradually develop
under the right system, but not without a lot of pain and reasonable
probability of going off the rails. Russia in the last 15 years for
I can only see anarchy working if you prevent pooling of power - which
seems best done by democracy. Just not democrazy.
More information about the FoRK