Democracy

The implicit premise of any self formed government, grown from society itself, is that there are people that can be trusted that create systems that can be trusted. And for the generation that creates such a government, assuring that this is true is paramount. Generations later, society is lulled into a sense of security - be it false or otherwise - and eventually there are those who would turn government toward their own private gain. And then, eventually, people learn to distrust the government and should society care enough about itself, they will create a new government. This used to be violent but with democracy it is not as violent. In fact, one would hope it isn't violent at all. I see this in the United States. It can be made more complicated, I suppose, but at the end of the day it falls down to people being able to trust the government to protect their interests. And those interests - those common interests - are a commons.

And then there are governments that are imposed on people.

If you follow the theory of evolution, genetics is the system by which an environment modifies a species. Some people think it's the other way around for some reason, but the truth is that genetics simply provides options for survival in an unpredictable future, an unpredictable environment, an unpredictable society. And our environment, natural or otherwise, culls who cannot survive.

And we've modified our environment. We've added other issues that cull those that cannot survive. We've created economies, and economies aren't good or evil. They just add some spin to the whole 'who gets to survive' issue. Those that are have more economic power have more healthy food available, have better shelter, and yes - better opportunities. It doesn't mean that these guarantee survival but they most certainly help with increasing the potential of survival. So, in our own way, we cull those that can't achieve a certain level of socioeconomic standing by assuring that they (or, we) don't get as good food, as good exercise, as good so on and so forth.

Some people feel bad about that and donate to make their own guilt go away. Famous people like that are sometimes called philanthropists. Maybe they grow enough to see some potential in the downtrodden, but since economic wealth flows up more than down the downtrodden are necessary for accumulating such vast amounts of wealth. The theory may be different but the practice is close to that.

The majority of nations on the planet are democratic. None of them are really democratic within the minutiae. Even so, countries continue saying that democracy is the best system out there...

But if democracy was the best system out there, wouldn't it be a global democracy instead of a collection of semi-democracies? Are the interests of the majority of the planet truly put forward, or instead are they lost within nation-states and then smothered at the global level?

I regret the sanity I have. It clashes with the insanity of the world.

You know that person that was just in front of you? Yeah. If you didn't see something nice in that person, someone else will. Yeah, but don't feel bad. Someone else will see something ugly in that person. The problem usually crops up when everyone agrees. They call it democracy.

Someone said that the second coming of Christ will happen. The odds are decreasing, though. Virgins are getting younger and younger these days.