Democracy is a logical fallacy

How should society be organised, if at all?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3213
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by HexHammer » Mon Jul 02, 2018 11:06 pm

Arising_uk wrote:
Mon Jul 02, 2018 2:59 pm
Yadda yadda ..bla bla ..bla!
I don't care if he said it or not, the result is still the same, the average voter has no fucking clue, falls flat on their faces for demagogues. Communism is an excellent proof of how stupid people are! Even when it's proven beyond reasonable doubt, they still believe in it.

There's great difference in democracy wester vs everything else, western allows freedom of speech, everything else suppresses it!

Further the problem is if all power went to the intelligent and well suited, they often becomes arrogant and elitists, will reign with callousness and great cynicism too often repeating medieval scenario where the upper class overwork the lower class like it happens i Teadrinker Land and Gunslinger Land here in present time!!

artisticsolution
Posts: 1932
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:38 am
Contact:

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by artisticsolution » Mon Jul 02, 2018 11:55 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:35 pm
Democracy = Majority is always right.

Democracy = Majority is always right...

Until they change their minds and a new definition of "right" becomes the trend.

That's the beauty of democracy...it's constantly changing. It makes sure people are not chained to a torturous ideology forever.

People are too stupid to know what is best for them. Democracy sees to it they don't have to suffer their stupid choices forever.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 5929
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:16 am

artisticsolution wrote:
Mon Jul 02, 2018 11:55 pm
Democracy sees to it they don't have to suffer their stupid choices forever.
Without sarcasm, this is actually a great point.

American-style democracy takes for granted that people may sometimes be good, but also are NOT always good, not always smart, and don't always make the right choices. Thus, it checks and balances power in the hands of any individual, and at intervals, it allows for correction.

No form of totalitarianism, whether monarchy, dictatorship or communism, allows that. Instead, under such regimes, people suffer indefinitely the choices made by some putative authority figure, with voice, no second chance, and no prospect of change.

This is what it means to say, as per Disraeli, that democracy is not an ideal system -- while still recognizing that it's just the best thing we've ever discovered so far. After all, where in the world would you find a more congenial government system than in the democratic west? As has been often noted, whether of Cuba or of the Mediterranean migrants, "All the boats are going one way."

So, well said.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11849
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:56 am

HexHammer wrote:I don't care if he said it or not, …
That's because you are an idiot.
the result is still the same, …
Well it's different in that the weight you wished to claim by using Churchill's name is gone.
the average voter has no fucking clue, falls flat on their faces for demagogues. …
Then educate them?
Communism is an excellent proof of how stupid people are! Even when it's proven beyond reasonable doubt, they still believe in it. …
Well it produced a lot of female engineers at least.
There's great difference in democracy wester vs everything else, western allows freedom of speech, everything else suppresses it!
No argument there but why would this make a difference if you claim that all the people are stupid anyway, i.e. what point free-speech if it's just nonsense?
Further the problem is if all power went to the intelligent and well suited, they often becomes arrogant and elitists, will reign with callousness and great cynicism too often repeating medieval scenario where the upper class overwork the lower class like it happens i Teadrinker Land and Gunslinger Land here in present time!!
Or in Scandinavian countries where if it wasn't for proportional representation the far right would rule in many of them.

User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3213
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by HexHammer » Tue Jul 03, 2018 2:29 am

Arising_uk wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 12:56 am
HexHammer wrote:I don't care if he said it or not, …
That's because you are an idiot.
No, that's because I'm intelligent and it doesn't matter, it's irrelevant, which a high functional retard like yourself can't distinguish.
the result is still the same, …
Well it's different in that the weight you wished to claim by using Churchill's name is gone.[/quote]Still no, sure it's diminished a bit, but not fully and the quote by itself is still powerful and true.
the average voter has no fucking clue, falls flat on their faces for demagogues. …
Then educate them?[/quote]No amount of education can make up for complete lack of cognitive abilities, just look at yourself, you are a high functional retard aka "rainman"
Communism is an excellent proof of how stupid people are! Even when it's proven beyond reasonable doubt, they still believe in it. …
Well it produced a lot of female engineers at least.[/quote]That doesn't make up for the complete disaster it was.
There's great difference in democracy wester vs everything else, western allows freedom of speech, everything else suppresses it!
No argument there but why would this make a difference if you claim that all the people are stupid anyway, i.e. what point free-speech if it's just nonsense?[/quote]Look at the result, human rights are improved, business are improved, infrastructure etc etc, everything are improved because of free speech!
Further the problem is if all power went to the intelligent and well suited, they often becomes arrogant and elitists, will reign with callousness and great cynicism too often repeating medieval scenario where the upper class overwork the lower class like it happens in Teadrinker Land and Gunslinger Land here in present time!!
Or in Scandinavian countries where if it wasn't for proportional representation the far right would rule in many of them.[/quote]No, if no vote no representing.

User avatar
Arising_uk
Posts: 11849
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 2:31 am

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Arising_uk » Tue Jul 03, 2018 3:56 pm

HexHammer wrote:No, that's because I'm intelligent and it doesn't matter, it's irrelevant, which a high functional retard like yourself can't distinguish. …
If you were intelligent you'd have just said what you thought about the voter rather than trying to seem smart and quote Churchill, that you got it wrong just shows what an interweeble you are.
Still no, sure it's diminished a bit, but not fully and the quote by itself is still powerful and true. …
Winston Churchill disagrees with you.
No amount of education can make up for complete lack of cognitive abilities, just look at yourself, you are a high functional retard aka "rainman"
You're an idiot and given that I'm surprised you have the front to accuse others of a lack of cognitive ability but then that is what idiots do. Education opens most minds.
That doesn't make up for the complete disaster it was.
Kerala seems quite happy in comparison to the rest of India but the serfs disagreed with you.
Look at the result, human rights are improved, business are improved, infrastructure etc etc, everything are improved because of free speech!
Who's arguing against free-speech, it's you saying democracy is a waste of time?
No, if no vote no representing.
You think there should be no democracy? The far-right of Scandinavia agree with you.

philosopher
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by philosopher » Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:04 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 2:10 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sun Jul 01, 2018 1:57 pm
Don't know how to explain further, but you did it quite well. Thanks!
It's only fair. I didn't think you meant what he was attributing to you. You're quite welcome.
Besides, there is an alternative to democracy that is not dictatorship: Rule by experts!
Plato thought that, too. He argued for "philosopher kings" to rule.

But there's a number of problems with that idea, and with the idea of "expert" rule. What's an "expert"? Who gets to say who is an "expert," and who is not? Are we talking merely an "expert in political systems," or an "expert in academic knowledge," or an "expert social engineer," or an "expert in controlling the masses," or an "expert in" something else? Does such an "expert" have to be a "good" person, morally? And how do we determine what a "good" person is? Who gets to say that?

You see the many problems. And they can hardly be rushed past, since failure to treat one of them seriously could have very dire consequences. For example, by rushing past the question of whether "expert" knowledge is political or moral, we could end up with rule by an expert manipulator with no moral conscience at all...very bad, we'd all agree. Equally, by preferring a "moral" leader to a "practical" one, we could end up with somebody who means well but lacks the applied knowledge to do us any good.

In practical terms, rule by experts turns out to mean, "rule by whomever somebody proclaims an expert." But who is that "somebody"? And how do we know he or she has the right take on what an "expert" is?

It's against such abuses that democracy was first contrived. The idea was that nobody's really a trustworthy "expert," with all the necessary virtues to rule embodied in himself. So the best we can do, provisionally, was decided to be a system that checks against and balances off his putative "expertise" with the broadest possible reading of the freedoms of all individuals, regardless of their "expertise," plus a strict limitation on the authority of any one person.

Not a bad idea, if you ask me; certainly better than the obvious alternatives.
Well, I believe a good alternative to democracy is the rule of the experts, elected by representatives of the people, who are then elected by the people. It may seem like democracy, but it is neccessary with this extra "buffer" to prevent - as much as possible - demagogues from getting power.

I would propose the following system:

In many modern western societies, especially in Western Europe, we have Trade Unions, some for labourers and some for the employers and industry.

I suggest a system where the Trade Unions decide the experts by election. The Trade Union Representatives should be elected by the people, except if one is member of the Employers Organizations or Industrial Organizations, they have the right to vote in those unions, while those who vote in the Labor Unions do not have a vote in the Industry Unions.

Trade Unions should be established by law, and should represent:

A: Workers, Pensioners & Unemployed.
B: Employers & Industry.

Each group's number of representatives should be corresponding to the number of people represented by each group.
So, if there are more employers than workers, the employers get more representatives than the workers and vice versa.

When the representatives have been elected in each union, we have a parliament, say 179 members of Trade Union Parliament. Then they HAVE to pick experts for each ministry/department - by election of course. Experts willing to join, should be candidates and these candidates are elected by majority of vote by members of parliament.

For instance, you have to be a doctor and have worked X years as a doctor, before you can work in the Ministry of Health. And you have to be an economist to work in the Ministry of Finance.

They are picked by majority of vote by the representatives in the parliament - not by any Head of State or Prime Minister. Though, we should have a Prime Minister but his role would be to address the nation of the decisions made by the parliament.

This way we still have elections but without demagogues and without populist parties. Actually, no parties should be allowed. Political Parties should be banned, we should only have Interest Organizations, corresponding to the interests of the various areas of society. It will work somewhat similar to political parties, except for the crucial part that their interests are clear and visible for everyone to see and they are not in parliament, but outside the parliament within the Trade Unions.

In todays politics, political parties have various names and interests. Conservatives would claim to speak pro-social welfare, only in order to get more votes, while social democrats would speak in favor of indutry, to gain their acceptance as well.

By eliminating political parties and establish Interest Organizations, it becomes very clear indeed who's with who.

These interest organizations should be formed in the Trade Unions before the elections.

Members of Parliament are elected representatives of the Trade Unions, and they are not obliged to follow any party politics or even the interests of the trade unions. They are individuals and the vote by their own conscience.

To ensure the MP's are not making any laws that give them even more power, say become dictators and abolish elections, there should be a constitution which ensures certain liberties and press freedom, the right to assembly and the right to vote in Trade Unions every 4th year, no matter wether or not one is recieving benefits, imprisoned, retarded or whatever. If you are a citizen, 18 years old and live in the nation, one has the right to vote.

The constitution should only be changed by the vote of the majority of people, after at least 2/3 of parliament wants such a referendum.

This entire system ensures that the interests of the people - not the politics of the people - only the interests - are maintained while still maintaining elections and some kind of democracy.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 5929
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Immanuel Can » Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:41 pm

philosopher wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:04 pm
I suggest a system where the Trade Unions decide the experts by election.
Having been a member of a trade union for a very long time, I can confidently tell you that that would be a very bad idea.

Unions, in the ideal, operate not in the general interest, but in the interest of their members. But in truth, they tend to operate more for the larger mass of union members than for any particular members of the union -- individuals come second to collectives, in their practice. And worse still, they tend to become institutions with an interest in their own perpetuation even more than in the interests of either the individuals within them, or even the interests of the present collective of members. Instead, their imperative becomes to serve their own union, and to guarantee the perpetuation of their own institution...

In those regards (but not all) unions can become quite toxic...and often do.

I would move to a regular democracy, if I were you. The unions would eat you alive, the very minute you stopped serving their interest in perpetuation of the union itself.

philosopher
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by philosopher » Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:33 pm

Immanuel Can wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:41 pm
philosopher wrote:
Tue Jul 03, 2018 5:04 pm
I suggest a system where the Trade Unions decide the experts by election.
Having been a member of a trade union for a very long time, I can confidently tell you that that would be a very bad idea.

Unions, in the ideal, operate not in the general interest, but in the interest of their members. But in truth, they tend to operate more for the larger mass of union members than for any particular members of the union -- individuals come second to collectives, in their practice. And worse still, they tend to become institutions with an interest in their own perpetuation even more than in the interests of either the individuals within them, or even the interests of the present collective of members. Instead, their imperative becomes to serve their own union, and to guarantee the perpetuation of their own institution...

In those regards (but not all) unions can become quite toxic...and often do.

I would move to a regular democracy, if I were you. The unions would eat you alive, the very minute you stopped serving their interest in perpetuation of the union itself.
The purpose of a union should not be the union itself - it should be better working conditions, establishment of Basic Income and good pensions and a good life for the workers, sick, elderly, disabled.

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 5929
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Immanuel Can » Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:11 pm

philosopher wrote:
Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:33 pm

The purpose of a union should not be the union itself - it should be better working conditions, establishment of Basic Income and good pensions and a good life for the workers, sick, elderly, disabled.
Oh, I agree entirely. Unfortunately, what "should" be is often not.

Unions are collectives of people, as you know. And people do both good and bad things. Unions have done some good; but they are as susceptible as any human arrangement to corruption, and because of their collectivity, they tend to greatly amplify the effects of both good and bad decisions. They do secure pensions, but they also try to dictate members' politics. They do improve working conditions; but they enforce conformity and promote group-think. They maximize workers' influence, but they also use intimidation, peer-pressure and bullying to keep members in line.

Unions themselves are also institutions; and institutions tend to take on a life, and imperatives, of their own. When a union becomes fully institutionalized, it becomes indifferent to individuals, and indifferent even to its current members, and to become focused on the generating and extending of the union's own longevity and the union's power -- sacrificing both individuals and the present good of the members to the service of that larger goal. So, for example, if a worker has problems with management, the union may stop advocating in the member's interests, and start negotiating how to "sell out" that individual to the employer in such a way that the union's own interests are served. And I've seen that done more than once.

I'm grateful to my union for some things. I'm also very aware of the areas in which it failed to be what it should have been -- what you rightly say it should be.

Walker
Posts: 6693
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 12:00 am

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Walker » Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:13 pm

philosopher wrote:
Wed Jul 04, 2018 12:33 pm
The purpose of a union should not be the union itself - it should be better working conditions, establishment of Basic Income and good pensions and a good life for the workers, sick, elderly, disabled.
Since the union/employer relationship is adversarial (threat of walkout), should public sector employees have unions?

“When school children start paying union dues, that 's when I'll start representing the interests of school children.”
- Albert Shanker*



* Is Teachers Union Scrubbing Al Shanker’s Legacy?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/ ... 63029.html

User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 5929
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Immanuel Can » Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:37 pm

Walker wrote:
Wed Jul 04, 2018 1:13 pm

Since the union/employer relationship is adversarial (threat of walkout), should public sector employees have unions?
Actually, it's more complicated than that.

The union often gets more out of posing as adversarial, while negotiating with the employer, than it does out of being outright adversarial. And in some cases, the pose is very thin, and the union and the employer collude to negotiate a piece for the employer plus a piece for the union, with the good of workers actually backgrounded.

When I was in one of the most powerful unions, I was amazed at how symbiotic the relationship between a big employer and a big union could become. But then the workers came third, and the individual worker a poor fourth-place.

Ironic.

User avatar
Greta
Posts: 4397
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2015 8:10 am

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by Greta » Wed Jul 04, 2018 2:42 pm

The best thing about democracy is that it is not one of the alternatives. All possible alternatives so far have been tried, rejected and tried again, and the non democratic systems still routinely produce the kinds of power abuses that prompt people to agitate for democracy.

Still, it's not looking like there is a choice due to the distortion of democracy by Rupert Murdoch and other media demigods.

User avatar
-1-
Posts: 2779
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 1:08 am

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by -1- » Wed Jul 04, 2018 10:38 pm

philosopher wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:35 pm
Democracy = Majority is always right.
I am sorry, but this basic premise is dead wrong. It is not true. If you build an argument on it, your argument will be invalid.

Now, you could start with "Democracy=Majority always wins." That would be true.

philosopher
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:37 pm

Re: Democracy is a logical fallacy

Post by philosopher » Sat Jul 14, 2018 5:34 pm

-1- wrote:
Wed Jul 04, 2018 10:38 pm
philosopher wrote:
Sat Jun 30, 2018 10:35 pm
Democracy = Majority is always right.
I am sorry, but this basic premise is dead wrong. It is not true. If you build an argument on it, your argument will be invalid.

Now, you could start with "Democracy=Majority always wins." That would be true.
The majority believes they are right. The majority of voters believe in foolish stuff that experts say are wrong. The majority says the experts are wrong, and the people are right.

Therefore democracy should be abolished for the sake of the rule of experts and the praise of FACTS rather than "gut feelings"!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests