[mdp2021]

Interesting! Of course, I never stated "everyone is ... so power can": I the idea was that democracy is increasingly fit when populations respect a certain profile according many dimensions, and to the statistics HK peaks in some. But also regarding this juicy info that «people are latin or let's say sanguine»: there is an issue on measurements and it is difficult to get a "complete" idea of a population on quantitative data only, because many fundamental qualities are not measured. Regarding people being "sanguine": it is not a fault ("father Dante [Alighieri]" wrote of the existence of a legitimate state of being rightfully irate), it is not that a warm blooded human has less senses than a posed or "repressed" one: the issue is more with how civilized and cultivated a population is. Failing that, populations do look at the most humble profiles and believe them "a potential saviour of the Fatherland" - we could call that an effect of "ignorance", and it is a frequent phenomenon .

About «democracy why not»: traditional democracy is not "the goal / the end of the path" - but one could suppose it should take an advanced society to achieve its milestone reform, its improved successor, its next perfected form.

[xwolfi]

For the sanguine part it's really more "more sanguine than where I come from". I come from the North of France and have seen some mediterranean populations... Chinese people in HK top them in term of quickness of aggressivity, violence ramp up, frequency of verbal assault etc. It really feel like the fisherman village it was because the english invasion and I married one so I see how family dynamics are also, provided my wife is representative (poor family).

You can say all you want but when an angry man discovered his gf cheated on him during a vacation in Taiwan, murdered her, went back to HK, triggered an extradition debate with Taiwan, made the other side of the border angry in turn (how dare we isolate Taiwan as a jurisdiction, it's China all the same, they say between expletives), triggering a discussion of extradition to the mainland, making this side of the border angry in turn, triggering big protests, making the police angry in turn etc etc, you wonder: if anger was less prominent in everyone's reaction could they simply compromise ?

Someone lost a daughter in all this, and the murderer is free to roam the streets in HK, so what was the meaning of all that angry jazz...

[mdp2021]

You mentioned «Italy» and being «sanguine»: I consequently interpreted "sanguine" as "warmer", "brilliant", "extrovert", "emotionally available".

You are now presenting instances in which it seems that for "sanguine" you mean: "a beast".

Do not use the concept of "Italians" for that, because it would be improper factually. Italy (land of Pareto) is extremely composite, first of all, and in general you can easily find the most controlled people even among the most ignorant (probably owing to a very "integrated" societal configuration of the past). This in fact is a characteristic that is noted by visiting foreigners, in general noticing an extremely less violent environment (up to the label of "effeminate"). Note, numerically, that it is a country of moderate wine drinkers, among countries with much more marked habits towards consumption and substance type.

When I used 'sanguine' or 'warm blooded' I - of course - always assumed, "mentally lucid, reflective and controlled" at the same time. Because normal people are lively and with a functioning prefrontal all the times - the two things are not conflictual, they go together.

You have confirmed my statement «there is an issue on measurements and it is difficult to get a "complete" idea of a population on quantitative data only, because many fundamental qualities are not measured» - or, moreover, even when measurable and measured, it seems they are not easily apparent.

The topic though was "democracy deserving populations". Again: if the population is ignorant, they will be poor to disastrous in judgement: they will be unable to distinguish mice from eagles, they will take the first dog and call that dog "a leader that will lead us to years of cheers", they will believe things like "politicians should not receive a salary", they will believe that they have judgement where they do not have it. If the population is highly skilled - on average, median and typical -, democracy has more reasons to be a good idea. If the population is not, there surely is a problem to be fixed.

Hong Kong (e.g. top average IQ worldwide to some informal data, in absence of a "civilization index") projected an image of competence: if the image corresponds to facts, it would be a pity if representation is not extended. If a strong component of the population is competent, they should be empowered. And those who are "beasts", whatever the percentile they are in, majority or minority, and whatever the role they are in, appointed or marginalized, must be a social concern (of everyone, they themselves first) even outside the context of some "right for representation".