This post is just a quick post wherein I feel the need to set something straight regarding a post I wrote in November which is otherwise fine. In “The ballad of order and chaos“, I expressed a certain disdain for democracy as being vulnerable to mob mentality and “unbalanced avarice”, and advocated for some kind of meritocracy instead.
Now I think, for starters, how is democracy not meritocratic? You have to get out there and earn the trust of the majority of your electorate in order to get elected into any kind of office. Second, democracy is the only way there can be any shared power between the elected and the electorate, the state and the people. Without it, you have illiberal states that enter into mostly exploitative relationships in the sense that the state holds too much power over the people and the only way for people to influence the government is to protest, and there is no guarantee that the government will listen. Third, to see the argument of concern for mob mentality as a justification for rolling back democracy, particularly during the EU referendum and the aftermath of the vote, convinces me that such an argument is wholly illiberal. Not to mention, how do you guarantee that putting democracy out of the picture won’t get rid of any kind of mob mentality? You’d have revolutions that end up in mob mentality even in non-democracies. If I’m not mistaken, that’s what happened to Libya.
Also, world order? What was I thinking?