Is democracy a meme?

Is democracy a meme?
Is one master chef better than a hundred mediocre ones?

you obviously havent lived under a dictatorship

Not OP but I have (ex-Soviet block), it kept shit in order. Have you?

Name ONE good dictator who didn't oppress his own people, didn't bring them into war, or didn't fuck over their economy

Tito.

Democracy works as long as the population has a high average IQ.

It presupposes a certain amount of cognitive ability from the average voter.

It's not just IQ, it's also culture. People must be genuinely interested in politics and legislation. I know plenty of high IQ engineers who are fucking indifferent to politics and just vote like robots.

>it kept shit in order
doubt.jpg

>didn't bring them into war
>didn't fuck over their economy

Not that guy but I think the problem is when they decide that you're the thing trying to get things out of order.

>Democracy works as long as the population has a high average IQ.
guess that's why democracy will never work
low-intelligence plebeian normalfags make up at least 80% of the population
when will a dictator (me) rise up and force them into slavery?

True.

I'm very skeptical if the high IQ chinese are democracy compatible.

Democracy is a meme. But it's still superior to any other form of government.

The only real problem with democracy is that people can actually vote for someone who is trying to dismantle it.

>guess that's why democracy will never work
But it did and does work to some extent.

Even in the USA. The white american population, as a whole, usually think through their political opinions and vote accordingly.

It's the minorities who vote 99% of the time for the same party out of slave-think...

i did although i was a kid, the issue is nepotism, ppl being above the law, no chance of useful criticism

there are no breaks for human greed and thirst for power

also OPs pic gassed ppl who were different than the majority, im done with that really

The reverse effect also exists. Franco wanted for monarchy to return after his death and then the fucking king just established a democracy.

It always seems like everything goes to shit after the dictator dies. I think that some form of democratic monarchy would be better

Is it in white people's interests to vote zionist stooges who start wars in the middle east in the name of Israel?

Democracy is the worst form of government known to man. I am speaking, of course, of modern Western democracy which is based off of so-called enlightenment ideas of universal human equality and rationalism. Democracy is rule by money rather than authority.

Modern liberal democracy and Lockean individualism are maladaptations that the Anglos succumbed to under Norman oppression. The end game of our current value system leads toward total rational self destruction through the 'liberation' from all forms of order and hierarchy. If you are an egalitarian who confirms Lockean assumptions of equality, and yet rejects the religious foundation of his reasoning, you are an irrational zealot.

>I think that some form of democratic monarchy would be better
but rich people would just buy votes
dictatorship of the people is the way to go

Nepotism and corruption is also rampant in democracies, look at East Europe, Argentina, Brazil, Italy etc.

I meant something like a constitutional monarchy where the king has powers to dissolve the congress or remake everything when it's going to shit.

and what stops him from doing that when things are not going to shit?

100% chance the king would say fuck it on the first day and massacre congress given the chance he will become supreme leader

Like all political systems, democracy can be subverted. But it's not as bad as other systems.

It's because the dictators are often smart and capable men with enough brains and balls to their power, but their successors are either their spoiled family members or spineless ass kissers, not other capable men. This is why I think nazi Germany would've completely imploded even if they won a war, there would be no capable heir to Hitler.

>anyone who isn't an SJW is fat
This is what leftypol snowflakes actually believes

it is better than it was before, which is hard to imagine but getting a car didnt depend on your wallett or job but if you knew someone in higher circles or you were just a pleb in the queue

Based on how the USA goes apeshit crazy during each election season I can say that democracy was a horrible mistake that does nothing but divide the country.

monarchy is more of a meme

Most of the world is either democracies, democracies in all but name, and democracies in name only with the first one being the most stable and prosperous and the last one being the most shitty.

I mean name a dictator right now that is in charge of a first-world country.

They've never done that, mate.

Is that man autism incarnate?

hit too close to home?

Democracy is shit

Technocracy and rule by an enlightened oligarchy is where its at.

The only time dictators are really justified is in moments of great upheaval. The Roman concept of Dictators, a wise man granted absolute power temporarily in response to an emergency, was the correct one.

I think some countries had bad beginnings and are too new to have democracies.

When the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea is a thing you know democracy is a thing to stay.

gotta start somewhere

France had to go through five democracies to get it right. They'll get good eventually.

Democracy is the way to make sure that the Middle East never rises again. It's a self-destructing system, where we let the low IQ, high time preference majority influence the future of the state.
The only reason it is able to work in the west is because the west had amassed huge wealth to burn, but now with mass immigration of low IQ, rent-seeking immigrants it sure won't last long.

Russia ?

Not to mention the billions of dollars that goes into these political campaigns in marketing and advertising, lobbyist and over sensationalism in news media. Democracy is indeed a meme.

>Russia
>first world
user, I...

Putin is an elected head of state, at least in theory.

>Democracy is indeed a meme
Democracy is only good if sufferage is limited ala Ancient Greece or you have small conservative nation like Switzerland.

When people don't have the education and are poor they'll put a former bus driver who didn't even graduate high school in charge like it happened in South America. A country like that has to have the most capable man in charge (that cares about the people of course)

Democracy became a meme once you let women have the ability to vote

Russia isn't really a country you'd want to live in. It's a democracy, in theory, but in practice, everybody knows that the KGB is running things behind the scenes.

We voted in a reality show host as Potus, no real standards to speak of.

Besides democracies are not about leadership fetish like autocracies, whose ebbs and flows depend completely on who's behind the wheel, that's the beauty of a democracy.

>give women vote
>become superpower

Lee Kuan Yew

iraq was not started in the name of israel, it was started in the name of protecting america from WMDs

didn't realize white people were a nation

In America everyone with brains knows the Deep state is running things behind the scenes. It's no different.

Causation =/= Correlation

you say that women votes ruin democracies, and though I might not prove it made it better it at least proves it didn't make it worse (I mean are you saying 50s America was a meme?)

>it was started in the name of protecting america from WMDs

lel

>you say that women votes ruin democracies, and though I might not prove it made it better it at least proves it didn't make it worse (I mean are you saying 50s America was a meme?)

I don't know. I didn't live in that era and I doubt you you lived in that era either. I can only speak on behalf of the era I'm currently living in.

Depends on what you want the organisation of politics achieve?

If you want optimisation of wellbeing of individuals, then merely due to the incredible complexity of economy, society and basically the preferences of each individual, a single person will be vastly unefficient than some well designed, all inclusive decision making process.

How does it come that the "Deep State" simultaneously is all-powerful, running the whole country without leaving verifiable evidence behind from their hundreds of thousands of interactions they must've had and the conspiracy still is so bad that a clueless, influence-less basement-dwelling NEET that has never even been in an archive, let alone could interpret the material he would find, can see through the conspiracy?

Maybe the conspiracy is just bullshit and there's no "Deep State" in the US?

>there's no "Deep State" in the US?
uhh the "deep state" isn't a conspiracy. It's the REAL term for the collection of agencies such as the CIA, NSA, FBI ect which don't change in between presidencies.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAha
AAHAHAHAHAHAH

hmm

that's a weaselly post if I ever saw one. If that's the case you can't really of any effects women voting had on the country. Unless you are in one of those third-world countries that recently gave women voting rights.

>high average IQ

Guess you're part of the problem then :^)

name any leader that fits all those criteria

>that's a weaselly post if I ever saw one.
"WAHH, you didn't give the response I was looking for!"

Not an argument.

>If that's the case you can't really of any effects women voting had on the country.

>implying women aren't voting today

It's a conspiracy theory if you say that those agencies secretly meet to coordinate their actions in order to "run the country" in place of elected officials, contrary to the interests of those elected officials.

Basically your argument amounted to

>I can't post historical evidence on a fucking history board because I'm not history

Really I just think you're pulling your argument out of your ass.

>implying women aren't voting today

but you can't list the effect it had on democracy since you are only using your life as reference and they were voting before you were born.

That's by design. Nobody ever wanted the president to be a dictator who could do whatever he wanted.

>>I can't post historical evidence on a fucking history board because I'm not history
What is Humanities?
>Really I just think you're pulling your argument out of your ass.
And where are you pulling your arguments from? Someone else's ass?>but you can't list the effect it had on democracy since you are only using your life as reference and they were voting before you were born.
History has en effect on current times, le Veeky Forums "Veeky Forumstorian". You should know this.

>think through their decisions and vote accordingly
>killing in the middle east is good because you tell me they're bad
If you even remotely believe 10% of any demographic actually researches, in depth, the true goals or agenda of any of their electorates then you're truly a romantic
>>if we ever manage to fight corruption in this country it will only be against non-corrupt/less corrupt politicians as scapegoats feelsbadman.jpeg

Plenty of 4 year term PMs or presidents fit all those criteria. Just not US ones, they seem to get tangled in the war part quite a lot...

>make an incredible claim
>argue some stupid sophistic shit instead of presenting any evidence or argumentation

I agree with that lad, you're pretty weasley.

Any middle eastern here? Would you agree that democracy is a way to prevent the Middle East from ever organizing again? In that the tribal rivalries will become party rivalries and degenerate into perpetual violence? And that developing nations specially Middle Eastern need a strong centralized state do develop?

>strong centralized state
With a strong man at the head?

Humanities also require evidence
quit using philosophical debate on human achievement as an excuse for all your inane /pol/posting

Correlation might not be the best evidence but it's much better than your "because I said so!"

I don't give a shit about those shitholes. My grandfather was killed during the communist regime here because he got drunk in a tavern and said that the americans could dismantle the soviet union if they wanted to. We have the documents of his arrest and execution, which were given to us after the regime fell. I now live in a democracy where shit like that does not happen anymore and if you think that democracy is on the same level as the god damn secret police paying you a visit because you prayed in public you're quite frankly an idiot.

His counterclaim was >>give women vote
>>become superpower


We gave women the ability to vote in Afghanistan. Where is muh progressiveness and superpower?

>>argue some stupid sophistic shit instead of presenting any evidence or argumentation
My response to that was correlation does not equate to causation.


2/10 bait for making me respond

They killed him just for that? What country?

I'm not saying his claim isn't stupid either...

And as for Afghanistan, stop thinking so logarithmically about history, 13 years of a new political system often doesn't magically transform a society.

>13 years of a new political system often doesn't magically transform a society.

The US disagrees with that.

yeah I agree
Afghanistan was a paradise before they gave women the vote.

(((Democracy))) as we know it today is a complete sham. Read Land. I'm not suggesting that his solution is necessarily correct but his criticism really gives you a different perspective.

Romania, and yes. He was saying that america was stronger than the soviet union and that they could topple the socialist regime in europe if they wanted to.

Yeah and so was the US with slavery and the civil war.

you become a master just by being the only one?

This. In my country my parents were targeted just for being university students. The pro dictator posts sound like a typical first worlders think they have it hard and/or are bored with their lives to the point they want some 'action' or something interesting like a dictatorship. It sounds childish, but a lot of these communist and fascist larpers really are.

>third world shitholes are taking more time to be democracies than predicted
>"That means democracy is bullshit! Never mind that all first world countries are either republics or very democratic constitutional monarchies that long neutered their monarchs"

you guys should stop basing your political views on LoGH

You have no idea what you're talking about.

Republicanism was very strong decades before the revolution and the revolution itself didn't transform the society so that in its liberal views it now included either women, blacks or hell, even non-landed white men into the electoral process, that was a gradual process that lasted almost 200 years...

that and the large ass civil war that wiped out a generation of Americans

>implying he did all that alone
His first cabinet was wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy better than his subsequent ones

>keeps shit in order
>dissolves

Ameriga X-DD

depends, a stable dictatorship is better than a democracy which lets political opponenets kill each other
that's just autism

>current geo-political situation
>still using cold war terminology
user-kun I will pay for fellatio