[flag_bcz_mad]

Why does everyone assume democracy is good? It clearly wasn’t necessary for Singapore. A well run “dictatorship” is much better than your average democracy. I would concede that a democracy filled with the right people is the best but in reality it is very rare to come upon a population that is actually ready to govern itself. People generally have extremely reductionist and incorrect opinions about such things in my experience.

[teddyh]

“Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time…”

— Winston Churchill

[mikeash]

Democracy is awful in all sorts of ways. Its one major advantage is non-violent succession, something other systems really struggle with.

Dictatorships can be great for a whole, but eventually you get a mad dictator or two people who both think they should be the dictator and it all falls apart.

[mempko]

Dictatorships are never great. Using economic arguments to support dictatorship is just being lazy, stupid, or both.

[chillacy]

Even though I think you’re right, you haven’t actually made an argument at all except repeating the mantra that “dictatorships aren’t great”.

[jenscow]

So, perhaps people should be able to vote for their dictator? :)

[michaelscott]

This is how the Romans thought of dictators, yes. The dictator was elected by nomination and then given supreme authority over state affairs, although usually only in a specific area of governance and with severe term limits.

The last guy who said "screw term limits" was ol' Julius Caesar, but he was iced not long after on the Ides of March and the office of dictator was abolished.

The title of dictator has taken on a negative connotation in the recent past for obvious reasons, but the idea of a competent or even brilliant man being given total control in order to accomplish a specific task for the good of a country is certainly something to consider regarding governance.

[mikeash]

That can work, until the dictator decides he doesn’t want to give up power and changes the rules. You need a system that makes it really hard to change the fundamental shape of the system itself, which isn’t compatible with dictators.

[torstenvl]

I mean, that's almost how the longest-running (partial) democracy in the world is run - the Roman Catholic Church.

[hkt]

History, largely.

Robust democracies are the best defenders of people's rights over time. They're the best self righting mechanism that is available for a nation-state when its economy, civil liberties, and living standards get out of whack. It is also the only way to reconcile a society with large numbers of powerful competing interest groups. It is certainly not perfect but it is, as the old saying goes, better than anything else.

[mango7283]

That seems to be more a function of a robust Constitution and institutions than democracy...

[hkt]

The UK, where I am from, has no constitution in the sense you might understand it. We do really quite well, though.

[mango7283]

The UK is the archetypal constitutional monarchy though! The UK may have no Constitution as such but it arguably has strong institutions and laws...

[Nasrudith]

Why are you assuming Singapore is truly well run? Dictators lie their asses off about quality of life and paper over problems with violence. Just wealth isn't a reason - Saudi Arabia is wealthy but sure as hell not well run.

[rorykoehler]

Singapore is exceptionally well run. I'm posting this from the sofa in a HDB (government built housing). Sure it has its problems as this story identifies but it is the safest most well built city I've ever been in and I've been all over the world.

[kreeWall]

Having lived in Singapore for 10 years, I can attest to the high quality of life there, much higher than I have experienced anywhere else in the world.

[spuz]

> Why does everyone assume democracy is good?

They don't. As long as it has existed, people have pointed out its flaws.

https://www.economist.com/news/essays/21596796-democracy-was...

[gerbilly]

> A well run “dictatorship” is much better than your average democracy.

Until the benevolent dictator dies and is replaced with a 'less principled dictator'.

[michaelscott]

A benevolent (and in some cases not even benevolent) dictatorship has historically accomplished more for a country in a shorter amount of time than a democracy, but it requires the right combination of exceedingly rare qualities in a leader and everybody dies eventually.

[tomjen3]

Democracy isn't good, but the alternative isn't to have a dictatorship; it is to not make peoples rights subject to a vote and thus have no need of a government*

*courts, etc yes. Government no.

[dragonwriter]

> courts, etc yes. Government no.

That's like saying “Red, etc., yes, but no colors.”