On Democracy

Democracy has been accepted as the most suitable form of government for most nations around the world. Not so many dare to challenge the idea of democracy, saved for some crazy advocates of theocracy and tyrants. Even some autocrats still use the idea of democracy; their own version of democracy, of course.

The idea of legitimizing a government from the vote of the people, through a general election for example, has been one of the central tenets of democracy. That will bring us into TWO questions.

1. Who is legitimate to vote?
2. Who is legitimate to be elected?

I will address question number one first. The idea that every man/woman has one equal vote in determining the course of the nation is appalling. It means the subjugation of the true ideal to the popular beliefs. It is like voting using SMS in TV reality show; not the best one wins, but the most popular one. For a TV show, maybe I still can accept it (with grumps), but for the course of a nation, it is closer to a disaster actually.

Only a man who is capable of making a rational, informed and unbiased judgement can vote. And in democracy today, that is a far cry. No wonder, democracy today is actually a plutocracy, the centralization and power and wealth among a small group of rich people, because the rich CAN manipulate the mass, simply because the mass can be manipulated. Thanks to democracy.

The ideal of democracy can be only fulfilled when ALL of the mass is educated to make a rational, informed and unbiased judgement. That is close to impossible due to the imperfect nature of man. Therefore the next best thing is NOT allowing everyone to vote.

Now for question number two, who is eligible to be elected. The idea of equality to be elected is also appalling. It is against the fact and against the law of nature. Each of us differs in capability and resource possession. The one who has more will have more chance the one who have less. 

The idea of allowing everyone an equal chance to get elected means we allow the incapable to lead us, given he/she gains the majority support. Given the manipulability of the mass, we are ended with getting a leader who is not the most capable, but who is the best in manipulating the mass.

Only the one with capability in leadership, the best of the best among the citizens are allowed to lead. Therefore, the election will be among the best individual, not the richest.

With those two questions, I hereby challenge the central tenet of democracy, which are universal suffrage and equal opportunity to be elected.