Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Is democracy really the problem?

chrstphrbnntt

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
February 04, 2008, 10:08:42 AM
Quote
In my oppinion, one of the the main problems is that the human race did not evolve to be a race that spread out through the entire world and lived in mass populations. Anarcho-Primitivism is my ideal form (or lack thereof) of government.


"The human race with technology is like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine."

This is true. However, you say 'ideal'. Ideally, the human race would be intelligent enough to utilize technology, helping realize the potential of the species fully. Eugenics works toward that goal, and only a strong central government can successfully implement a eugenics program.

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
February 05, 2008, 03:07:59 PM
Two ways to do eugenics:

1. The Hitler way. Strong central government defines standards, wipes out the dumb, perverse, criminal et al.

Pos: Effective quickly.
Neg: stronger central government, possibility of abuse.

2. The Ron Paul way. Make no one obligated to take care of the stupid and weak, and reign in the economy so it's no longer all-obsessing. The strong ignore the weak.

Pos: No central government issue.
Neg: Slow, and the inferiors tend to rise up and using superior numbers, fucking kill you dead

I think there also has to be room in here for moral combat, meaning those who have spirit excluding and defeating the craven.

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
February 06, 2008, 12:41:28 AM
The Ron Paul way is generally more palatable in a democracy. Once the idea spreads that eugenics is good, you can move to more immediate means.

shadowmystic

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
February 06, 2008, 02:03:52 AM
Quote
I think there also has to be room in here for moral combat, meaning those who have spirit excluding and defeating the craven.


Perhaps in the future the creation of an elite eugenics squad armed with M4's, ebola, and spermicide is in order.

...note, effective method of population control could be to put some sort of anti-fertility chemical in water supply of major cities.

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
February 06, 2008, 07:21:32 PM
I like the idea of legally protecting small communities that exclude people for "arbitrary" reasons.

It'll stop the passive aggression at least. "But it's my right to move to Norway, because without 400 lb lesbian midget Jew for Jesus albino mulattos like me, they're not diverse!"

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
June 22, 2011, 10:09:18 AM
bump.

I'd recommend starting from the beginning: long threads tend depreciate in quality after a certain number of responses / pages is hit.

Anyway, this is an interesting example of how the forum has changed over the course of 3 years.

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
June 22, 2011, 04:56:57 PM
Quote
Is democracy really the problem?

No. Democracy is an implementation some layers removed from the first cause of the problem which begins with the General Adaptation Syndrome of the many. When unchecked, its social manifestation is leftism which transitions through alternate political stages of mass society that, coming full circle, ultimately results where it first begins within the individual: as anarchy.

Still, let's adjust the semantics so that we may appropriately answer. A democracy limited to a council of its brilliant elders is not a mass egalitarian democracy, which is the actual subject of our topic. Democracy can be a tool among other options for quality leadership. Its implementation is key:

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/authority.html
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/misery.html
http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/popular.html

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
June 22, 2011, 05:16:48 PM
if a loss of contact with the transcendent spawns democracy (or any other populist system), wouldn't that be the answer to the OP?  If so, it was already answered on the first page.  Of course that would beg the question of whether any recorded government has ever truly transcended our condition.

While democracy if implemented properly could 'work', I would be of the opinion that the moar peepole you throw into the mix, the less likely you are to transcend.

If we can agree that transcendence is the ideal, i.e. holism on a cosmic level, rejection of anthropocentric thought, and spirit over ego, how does a society get there?

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
June 22, 2011, 06:11:17 PM
What causes the loss of contact? People begin favoring the impulses of the older, more primitive and pre-rational parts of the brain. Consider that GAS is our adapted response to stressors and that stress comes about when things take a radical or unexpected turn for the better or for the worse. As a social, or multiple proximate individuals effect, this may explain the mass society leftism, focus on materialism, and calls for people's democracy in each of:

  • affluent post war 1960 USA
  • unhappy Russia 1917
  • miserable France with King Louis XVI

Re: Is democracy really the problem?
June 22, 2011, 08:53:46 PM
The problem is fear of hierarchy, and insistence on equality, and thus prole leadership. It's all liberalism. Democracy is just its tool.