Why are Europeans/Americans so impressionable to fall for charismatic demagogues in politics?

You mean to say that a political system which chooses its leaders through a glorified popularity contest is vulnerable to charismatic individuals who take great care to ingratiate themselves to the public?

>glorifies popularity contest
Our voting system is an even bigger joke than that honestly. Our votes mean almost nothing.

Shouldn't educated nations be least vulnerable to this? And yet it keeps happening.

Educated nations don't exist. Have you met the average person from a first world country?

Yes, in Japan.

>Le nothing matters meme
I'm so sick of hearing this shit.

99% of people are fucking stupid.

>Our votes mean almost nothing

On this we are in accord. But the principle of what I was saying remains the same.

It's worthy to note however that the founding fathers sought to curb the influence of mob. They didn't believe in universal suffrage. Senators were elected by legislatures, not the public. The president is technically elected by the Electoral college, not the people. It's just that as we've become more 'progressive' that we've removed many of the obstacles originally erected to keep the oscillating whims of the masses from exerting too much influence over the operations of government.

It's true you mong. It was designed to be that way.
Bear in mind, I used to resent the very existence of the Electoral College, but now I've come to see its purpose. However, I feel that it needs to be reformed.

Do you think the Founding Fathers would be disappointed over the way we conduct elections now?

>Do you think the Founding Fathers would be disappointed over the way we conduct elections now?
Jefferson would, but not for the reasons you'd believe.

>USA
>pinnacle of western civilization

USA might have a military and cultural dominance. But politically it's been a loser for quite some time.

Why's that?

the history of Latin America is basically the history of populist politics and ocasional Intelligence Agency sponsored coup de etat

>educated nations
never seen one

Japan doesn't have charismatic demagogues because it doesn't have democracy. It's basically an one-party state with the Liberal Democratic Party controlling everything.

Latin American countries used to be like this too when they were oligarchies.

>mfw people cry about demagogues

its proof democracy is working , you made your bed , you sleep in it faggots

No. I didn't make the bed. Someone else did.

I'm only in charge of bringing a pillow.

>WE ARE THE 1%

Reddit

EVERYBODY IS A FUCKING DUMBASS BUT ME The thread.

Holy shit you are retarded. You really think you can degrade the power of a movement by belittling it for not living up to your arbitrary social norms? If a fascist regime arose in your country and started putting gays up against the wall, you'd probably say "lol they're so homophobic and regressive, look at them". You are so fucking divorced from reality it's sad. Fortunately, you will leave high school one day, so there's still hope.

Finland

How /triggered/ would Veeky Forums be if this was OP's pic?

Why would I sleep in a bed that I just made

That doesn't make any sense

We're in a cycle of "let's throw shit to the wall and see if it sticks"

We're going through every one of our shitty parties

I'd be triggered because

>charismatic

would be completely inaccurate

She's charismatic to another crowd

Consider the argument that democracy doesnt emerge or really work in societies under a certain IQ threshold.

If that is true, its likely that the median first world IQ of ~100 cannot support a better system than the current model.

While a 100 IQ brings with it the civility and intellectual rigor needed to maintain a first world standard, too many people cant "think around corners" and as a consequence fall for the same things over and over again.

Why are they all ugly tho? How come there aren't any good-looking populists out there?

France's Le Pen is pretty MILF.

Democracy doesn't work full stop.

The best form of government is benevolent dictatorship (a la Tito), but the hard part of course is finding someone worthy of that position.

Doesn't she survive on showing herself to the voters as little as possible and very rarely confronting any actual political points? Not showing up is pretty uncharismatic t b h.

ey fuck you Don and Nigel look GOAT.

While I think you worded it poorly, I agree with your main point. This is why education (I'm thinking up to highschool here) is so important in democracies. You don't have to be a professor in political philosophy but you could do well to have some very basic understanding of economics and knowledge of political positions. Everyone should be able to watch the economic news on the television and don't think "wow I'm not sure I know what they meant because I don't know what the word "inflation" means".

We know that low IQ individuals are more likely to use violence to solve problems and act irrationally.

There is a possibility that average IQ individuals cannot effectively separate the idea of who they are as individuals from what they believe and are prone to emotional manipulation.

Education is vital but we may be looking at a situation where the majority of people are smart enough to understand but not smart enough to reason, especially in the face of uncertainty.

2007-2011: Rightist government formed by the following:
* "Central Party Always Betrays" Central Party [PM]
* "Corporate Fascism Is Totes Ok" The Party (National Gathering, er, National Coalition) [Treasurer]
* "We Totally Didn't Just Vote For More Nuclear Plants" Green Party
* Old Money Swedish (Privileged) People's Party.

During their tenure Finland continued integrating to the EU, denying any responsibility in selling national property for scraps to foreign corporations and shitting pants due to the rising popularity of the The Finns' Party (though a more accurate name would be Basic/Average Finns Party"; they're basically a central-rightist populist protest party, though nationalists also make their rows).
They received about 20% in the 2011-elections, which might explain the following line-up (as other parties refused to co-operate with them)...

20011-2015: "Rainbow Sixpack" comprised of the following:
- National Coalition [PM]
- "Corporate Fascism Is Totally Okay" Social-Democratic Party [Treasurer]
- Green Party
- "Equal Everything For Everyone, But Within The Confines Of Market Economy" Leftist Party
- "Install Theocracy" Christian Democrats
- Swedish People's Party

This government got basically NOTHING done, except leave all the unpopular decisions for the next government.

And the current one...

2015-2019:
- Central Party [PM]
- National Coalition [Treasurer]
- "Make Finland Great Again, Also Pure of Blood" The Finns' Party

This is the most rightist possible government we could have, and in just one year they've destroyed basically any destroyed any sense of fairness for the future among young Finns who are not total psychopaths/social darwinists, by cutting dramatically of poor people's services (including the handicapped) while letting the rich get away almost scot-free and making life even more confined for the poor. I don't know how many of their suggested policies will actually follow theough after they're done destroying the Fnnish Society, but it's not totally impossible that we could have a Round 2 for our Civil War's 100-year anniversary (2017).

But, maybe not. Gun control is through the roof here, after all.

S A L V E E N E E

because demagouges are in many chases better than the corrupt elites

corrupt elite at least share power between themselves, demagouges become dictators

She looks way to much like her father to be attractive.

The "corrupt elites" in politics were more often than not elected by being demagogues. Some demagogues (like Trump and LePen) are just better at making the headlines and appearing cleaner than their opponents.

Try and find an elected technocrat, it won't be easy. (And I mean actual technocrats like Mario Monti and his government in Italy a couple of years back, not what the media let demagogues define them as).