Should We Stop Having Elections?

If people’s opinions don’t matter, why do we bother having elections to set policy? Just have a “board of social decision making” make all the decisions. They’ll have the most up to date information, so we can trust them to make good ones. What could work better than a command economy? Historically speaking, almost anything did.


4 thoughts on “Should We Stop Having Elections?

    • Not that democracy is at fault, but that the logical implication of what John Oliver said is that we shouldn’t have democracy. Anthropogenic global warming / global climate change is not an abstract scientific theory, but a call for significant policy changes and regulation that would have a huge economic effect.


  1. One of the problem with the rule of scientists and technocrats is that their facts are in truth only the latest scientific theories — which they will change their minds on, ergo the “coming ice age” of the 1970s becoming the “global warming” of the 1990s. Or the Eugenics of the 1800s becoming the genocide of Hitler’s Germany.

    Another problem with the rule of scientists and technocrats is that they are only knowledgeable in a narrow field of expertise, but we give them credit for knowledge in fields where they know nothing. They are truly no more knowledgeable, generally, than anyone else.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s