>>6184

I am a fascist in a sense, depending on your definition of fascism which is a pretty vague/disputed in many cases. I think authoritarian is probably more precise. I know it's not a popular point of view and that's ok, I'm not going around forcing anyone to adopt my views. It's just my opinion that democracy is bad at producing good outcomes and that people are bad at selecting their own leaders.

In my ideal world, being able to vote on a topic would not be a right but a responsibility that is earned by demonstrating proficiency in the topic. It's certainly true that systems like this can be prone to corruption, but lets be honest, so is our current system, so are all systems. It's no coincidence that the most successful companies on earth are run like dictatorships, it historically produces better outcomes to have one person leading the vision forward for a project/company/country, someone who really understands the goals and implications and most importantly can make the *hard* choices that a democracy is simply incapable of making.

Some good modern examples of this are Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Bezos, etc. These companies are little dictatorships, and tend to do much better then the companies where boards and shareholders make all the calls. Rule by collaboration tends to lead to shortsightedness, but a single visionary can have a longer view and more ambitious goals.

There is nothing that fundamentally says that a dictator need be evil or that they even need be corrupt. It is true that that sort of power often corrupts (or more likely, attracts the already corrupted) but there are examples in history of this not being the case. The most compelling example my be ancient Rome, where the word dictator originates from. Dictators in Rome were a special appointment during times of extreme crisis (usually war) where a single person was given absolute power during the duration of the crisis because they understand that consensus is a bad way to deal with crises. These dictators were obligated to stand down and hand back ALL of their power as soon as the crisis was over, and they did that time and time again for hundreds of years.

Anyways, I do believe there is plenty of room for consensus decision making much of the time, but our modern societies have an extreme lack of an adult in the room who can make the hard choices and plan for the future. We, as democratic countries and societies, just behave like a bunch of children with no vision or direction, flailing wildly and always choosing what feels good in the short term even if it fucks over other people, makes everyone's lives worse, and ruins the world for our children. Nobody's rights extend so far that they can destroy our world and our future in the name of liberty.