[lewhoo]

> It's absolutely straightforward to uphold Democratic principles over Fascistic enterprises.

That may be, but it also seems perfectly logical to claim democracy is broken because a voice of an educated person carries same weight than that of a high school dropout. All you need to do is extend this logic a bit. I think it is because of our emotions, empathy or maybe something else that we see that this "flaw" in democracy isn't really a flaw.

> ill-equiped individuals being manipulated by other ill-equiped individuals

Except fascism wasn't only a manipulation. Had fascism succeeded it would've made the participating states extremely rich, powerful and influential throughout the next (maybe) hundreds of years.

[vpribish]

I appreciate your contribution to the conversation, but have to disagree : "Had fascism succeeded" is kinda of an impossibility. it's bad at doing things and internally eats itself as soon as it gets power. Fascism is not just <Alternative Government Style> as if it was a choice of haircut, it's cancer

[lewhoo]

> "Had fascism succeeded" is kinda of an impossibility.

Depends. If you assume succeeded indefinitely then this is a trap because such a thing is impossible (can only be deemed indefinitely successful at its end at which point it cant). Fascism could've been the new feudal era with the masters and slaves clearly defined but yes, I don't think it could've lasted forever if that's what you're saying.

[willsoon]

It's true. Fascism is something to die for... Not something to live for.

[throwaway171223]

> to claim democracy is broken because a voice of an educated person carries same weight than that of a high school dropout

Is not logical.

> fascism wasn't only a manipulation

No successful ideology is only a manipulation.

> Had fascism succeeded

I doubt anyone really knows why, but the historical fact is that it didn't.

[johnnyanmac]

>Is not logical.

How so?

>No successful ideology is only a manipulation.

Depends on how you define success. We can say "fascism didn't succeed" but it certainly didn't blow over as a trend. Not back then, and not now.

[throwaway171223]

As a common meeting ground between Hobbes and Rousseau (and probably Locke, which I confess I have not read), anyone can hold and fire a gun. Considering the original context in whence Greek democracy flourished, I'd say that's a fair extrapolation to modern times.

[johnnyanmac]

> Considering the original context in whence Greek democracy flourished, I'd say that's a fair extrapolation to modern times.

I don't think so. Even "democracy" in the lens of 18th is century America is rife with various prejudice that shouldn't existing in a pure democracy. I wouldn't extrapolate anything accurately from millenia ago if it degregates in a matter of a few centuries.

It's very easy to protest "equal vote for each person" when the ruling body gets to define "person" (or more accurately, "citizen") in their own emotion way