Comments on: Ancient Democracies Weren’t As Terrible As Modern Democracies

By: Anglican Minarchist

Anglican Minarchist — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 23:26:01 +0000

My reading on Athenian democracy is generally that up until the death of Pericles, democratic dysfunctions were kept in check by the fact that the demos were nonetheless inclined to elect exceptionally capable men (like Pericles himself) and let them govern. Once Pericles died, though, they ended up with demagogues (Cleon), second-rate statesmen (Nicias), and amoral adventurers (Alcibiades) in power. Socrates was killed largely for his association with young men (“corrupting the youth”) like Critias and Plato who saw the damage done by this system to Athens.

I think a much stronger anti-democratic argument can be made by looking at the French Revolution and its progeny. The effect of the press in shaping public opinion (which is of course central to Moldbug’s arguments) is a factor that didn’t really exist in the ancient world. I think it drives many of the pathologies we see in modern western liberal democracy. Put differently, the ancients didn’t have anything like a Cathedral in the neoreactionary sense.

It is also interesting that in Athens, many offices deemed within the reach of any normally capable man were filled not by election, but by lot, whereas the ten strategoi (generals, of which Pericles was regularly one) were elected. No election, no manufactured public opinion driving the debate.

By: Nick B. Steves

Nick B. Steves — Wed, 26 Aug 2015 19:21:19 +0000

character of the governors ultimately decides your fate

I think this is undoubtedly correct. I’m not even sure that intelligent advocates for democracy would disagree. The crux of the issue is what system ensures the best character of governor. I would contend the quality of governor is inversely proportional, statistically speaking, to the size of the committee charged with selecting him.

By: Mark Citadel

Mark Citadel — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 20:21:56 +0000

In Traditional society, the form of government does decentralize and so achieves what you seek. Fathers, landed nobility, and the local church are the prime authorities, with contact between the average individual and his sovereign monarch being rare, only exhibited through taxes and conscription, by and large.

By: Sam Cru

Sam Cru — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:41:27 +0000

The system by which you are governed is quite possibly irrelevant. The character of the governors ultimately decides your fate, and you cannot properly assess the character of someone if you don’t know them personally. Decentralization is the answer.

By: AntiDem

AntiDem — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:30:08 +0000

I don’t buy it. The earliest warnings we have about the dangers of democracy are from Plato, who was no stranger to Athens. In the back of the Republic is a section in which he analyzes the different types of governments that existed in his time, including democracy. The flaws he talked about then – loss of social and fiscal discipline, eventually leading to insolvency and then to tyranny as the people search for someone to restore order – are precisely the same basic flaws we see in our system now. They may be accelerated and turbocharged due to our modern technology (including media), but fundamentally, they’re the exact same problems.

Basic teleology tells us that A always, inevitably leads to B. That it should have done so more slowly in an age in which everything moved more slowly shouldn’t surprise us, and does not seem very significant.

By: SpecialFester

SpecialFester — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:50:37 +0000

*their, *their

By: SpecialFester

SpecialFester — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 14:49:19 +0000

The crucial difference is Egalitarianism. And as a white millennial, an American, and even a former Lutheran, I have been surrounded my whole life by the idea that this is a non-negotiable principle. It’s hard enough just to get people to see that the reason we have bad schools, is because we have bad students. How will we ever make the case to (blacks and Hispanics for instance) that the reason they’re communities have declined so greatly is because of they’re increased influence and participation in their government? Women? Etc.

By: Augustina

Augustina — Tue, 25 Aug 2015 01:34:52 +0000

Bad governance is the norm throughout history, and good governance is the rare exception. This is true for all forms of government. What keeps a people going through the times of poor governance is a strong culture. Unfortunately, we have a smoking crater where our culture used to be, so surviving our horrible government will be difficult.

By: vxxc2014

vxxc2014 — Mon, 24 Aug 2015 20:44:38 +0000

Very important essay.

We have to work with what we’ve got at hand and part of that is participatory government.

You are also correct in your diagnosis of corrosive leftism, but it’s corrosive everywhere. Even Stalin made getting rid of it his top priority.

By: Isaac Lewis

Isaac Lewis — Mon, 24 Aug 2015 13:27:13 +0000

I think one key difference between ancient and modern democracies is the invention of mass media. The early democracies were all connected to a single intellectual meeting place: if you weren't in the senate you could still get your case heard by the senate. The equivalent in modern times are mass media outlets screaming at each other.