Churchill’s point is that stupid things can still happen in democracies, but no one has come up with a better alternative. What would you suggest as the better alternative? If you don’t have one, then you just helped prove Churchill’s point!
So the only way to get anything done is to do it against the will of at least some people? You’ve never been in a group where you agreed on a course of action together?
So some form of tribalism? And what if you generally like living in your consensus community but one thing rubs you wrong and you’re against it? You just leave and look for a community where you agree with everything 100% all the time? Good luck with that.
Churchill’s point is that stupid things can still happen in democracies, but no one has come up with a better alternative. What would you suggest as the better alternative? If you don’t have one, then you just helped prove Churchill’s point!
Every human knows and has used a superior system from the time they first started playing with other people: Consensus.
So… A form of democracy?
Democracy is majority rule, and fuck whatever the minority wants.
Consensus is we don’t do anything unless we all agree.
Then you don’t do anything. Ok got it, 👍🏾
So the only way to get anything done is to do it against the will of at least some people? You’ve never been in a group where you agreed on a course of action together?
In a group… you mean a very limited setting where you can discuss directly with everyone and get direct feedback in real time from everyone?
How do you suggest that this might work on a large scale, with millions of people?
Edit: And if for example 10 million people somehow found consensus and then one guy is like “lmao no”, everything gets canned?
There’s lots of ideas about this, but my solution is to simply eliminate the idea that we need to rule millions of people.
So some form of tribalism? And what if you generally like living in your consensus community but one thing rubs you wrong and you’re against it? You just leave and look for a community where you agree with everything 100% all the time? Good luck with that.
So nothing gets done then.
…which is basically what democracy is, but systemitized such that it can be applied at scale.
If we had a consensus based government I wouldn’t have a fascist as a representative
There are more people than just you in your district
Yes and we should all agree on who is going to represent us. Otherwise the losing party is disenfranchised.
You’re not going to get unanimous approval for anything when your group size is several thousand people
Maybe the groups should be smaller then
Perhaps. But this is the system we have.
Also, smaller groups mean more representatives, which means unanimity/consensus as you say would also be unlikely at the national level.
Are you…high???
Yes but also yes
Its as if my shoe suddenly decided to strike up a conversation
Your shoe has a pretty good knowledge of anarchism. You could learn a thing or two from it
…what do you think democracy is?