Eagle367 said:
Zkuq said:
But then there's the issue of ensuring neutrality. How do you choose the people that uphold neutrality? How do you ensure the people will continue to be chosen in a neutral manner? At the moment, I can't see a way to ensure it. In my eyes, it's just another potential hole in the system, one that will seemingly work as long as everything's fine but is the first thing to go once someone anti-democratic comes to power. The people voting the anti-democratic people from power is the best roadblock, as far as I can see, because it keeps the power in the hands of many instead of few. |
Democracy is an active process and depends on good faith people. I think it's another layer of protection, not a weak point. Of course it doesn't guarantee anything but i think it creates an added safeguard. And many democracies already have this to varying success. |
I think this is where we have to agree to disagree, since we see the same thing, but where I see it as weak point, you see it as a functioning safeguard. (We could probably go more into depth with this, but I suspect it wouldn't be very fruitful without a humongous amount of effort.)
