Mob Rule

So you want a massive selfish majority to rule?

I want a benevolent dictatorship with no politics whatsoever

*shuffles into the Aegean*
HOL' UP
*hands out voting urns*
YOU SAYIN'
*falls into Syracusan pit*
THAT WE
*burns Melos*
WAS
*gets its walls smashed down*
THE DEMOS
*puts owls on your coins*
AND SHIT?

Mobs are stupid. Small groups can be quite intelligent

>corruption of the few is easier to get rid of than corruption of the many

It's harder to corrupt many people and it's easier to corrupt few people you know?

>I don't understand how the masses think

Due, I'm just asking if mob rule is anarchy or democracy. I'm not making value judgements about wether those things are good. Let me put it better.

Is mob rule majority rule?

Technically speaking, yes.

Is minority rule better than mob rule?

Yes, because minority rule is more efficient and usually, the minority chosen to rule is more intellectual.

When the minority becomes corrupted, the majority can take them out and replace them with their own chosen minority.

Are you one of those "my exact form of benevolent dictatorships havent been tried yet"?

>I don't understand how a country would work if only few people are om control

Both.

Yeah, like almost every country ever.

Do you support the democratic republic model then? A small ruling class that can be nonviolently replaced at the will of the masses? Do you support a more authoritatian model?

My opinion of that depends entirely on what country and what culture we're talking about.

But for the most part, a democratic republic is best. Authoritarian governments with full support from the masses would be good, but you rarely see those these days.

>like almost every country ever

I guess the Parliament and the Senate then are some magic creatures that you have never heard of.

They're literally an example of a minority ruling over a majority.

So you want black people ruling you?

...

Mob rule is quite clearly anarchy for several reasons
1. It is the rule of the few, street provocateurs, gangs and opportunists rule who are a small segment of the wider population and even among these groups there are often leaders who give orders
>got too lazy to write more reasons

Democracy
Anarchy has no rule

Then it is not Anarchy

>The majority of people are too stupid or corrupt to rule.
You included.

>Authoritarian governments with full support from the masses would be good, but you rarely see those these days.

This has never existed, the dissidents have only recently learned to read and write is all.

anarchy doesn´t mean anarchism