Why haven't you abandoned democracy yet?

Why haven't you abandoned democracy yet?
>majority
>brains
Pick one.

Welcome to jewcracy. This is one of their oldest tactics.

>Actually wanting your society to be run by iron-fisted autists with no populist recourse other than armed revolt.
You bring shame to the Swedes.

>Why haven't you abandoned democracy yet?

It's not even possible to say that without going to jail here.

Plato please shut up.

Monarchy is the best form of government.

If you let only 120+ IQs vote, Sweden would just let in more niggers than they are now.

The USSR tried technocracy. The people didn't like it because the short term consequences are shit

This is why democracy is more about deciding what vision you have for the country, the goals you want, (smart people can't argue against those things because it's opinions, it's subjective and it's what most people want). The function of smart people in democracy is finding out how to implement the will of the majority and to profit from it.

>not being able to have an opinion
>democracy

pick one.

You remove a large portion of the female vote doing that

that's sorta what's happening right now though
it's just buried

I vote Sweden Democrats and I have a tested IQ of 131

It's a great way to establish and keep a strong national identity, I'll give you that much.

Most people with a 120+ IQ have no political leanings going into college and they learn all the right opinions.

It really would be worse than it is now.

>implying i haven't
the average person has very poor reasoning skills

Why haven't you adopted a direct e-democracy yet?

Just goes to show how IQ means shit.

>All these blue-pillled faggots who don't know that voting is futile, that it is only through revolution you can bring forth political change

What the fuck are you on about
The USSR at no point made an attempt to be technocratic

>doesn't matter if you're the smartest kid

Yeah it does. If you're the smartest you will present your idea to the majority in a way they will understand it.

Unless you're just a fucking retard who's mad that he got outvoted by democracy.

The monarch or any democratically elected head of state should act as the protector of the people against the legislative powers. If the king/president feels the government/elites are going against the will or the good of the people he should put a stop to it. Government officials are really the servants of the people, it should be a burden not a privilege to work in the government.

Hitler was elected, so I'm going to keep voting till someone presents a better idea (other than killing myself).

You're implying that 120+IQ people can't take dumb decisions. And that is false. Being wise is more important than having a high iq.

In 1986 89% of politburo members had an engineering background

>lol stupid democracy
>but the people who are the best at getting power will have everyone elses best interests at heart I'm sure

Daily reminder that not a single great thinker had anything good to say about democracy.

Until a shitty monarch inherits the kingdom and runs it into the ground

Because power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,

Literally the only reason needed

we kind of abandoned democracy after the viking age when europe went full game of thrones. most of the countries in europe worth living in are monarchies

but i wouldn't call what americans or germans have for democracy. it's indirect democracy at best. by 18th century standards america is living under serfdom, or worse

What are: Benevolent dictators

Is that so?

>implying some high functioning 156 IQ autist would be a good leader

That's cool man I can read stuff on wikipedia too

America isn't and never was intended to be a democracy, anyone who tells you that is politically illiterate.

its a Republic

That won't happen in a white monarchy without jews.

I'm already opposed to universal suffrage. Early Americans had it right when they limited the franchise to landed men.

Rare.

I have, when the rest of you cucks join me, we can have National Socialism and end jewish control over our political system.

So monarchy?

Yes. I dare you to find a great thinker who said something positive about democracy. Comb through the works of the founding fathers, the Enlightenment thinkers, the Romans, the Greeks... you'll find nothing but contempt for majority rule.

Only Jean Jacques Rousseau was kind to democracy, and even then, he only believed it could work on a very small scale (a few hundred people at most).

What are unicorns?

Equally real as benevolent dictators.

First time I have ever agreed with a swede, democracy is filth.

Things become a problem when they're taken too far, user.

I am all for absolute democracy, as long as we don't have absolute suffrage. I am also for absolute suffrage as long as we don't have absolute democracy.

Applying a general theory to society and expecting it to function, notwithstanding specificities is just plain stupid.

It's about not being stupid. If you aren't, democracy works.

>Europe flag
HEY Sup Forums, EUROPE ISNT A FUCKING COUNTRY

>inb4 Emperor Stephen Hawkings

>have idea
>majority doesn't like it
>muh democracy sucks

Democracy has worked for hundreds of years here. Guess John Adams died too early.

Stay a slave

Although it has several downsides, it's always going to be the superior system for the majority of the population because it ensures to the highest degree possible that their will is reflected in the country's highest power. If you don't have governmental representation, your interests will be voted against every-time they run into conflict the interests of those who do.

This is of course using democracy in the modern sense, an umbrella term including direct democracy and republicanism, rather than literal, absolute democracy. Absolute democracy doesn't work, but that's not really a suitable criticism as there's no political system/ideology that works when used to the complete exclusion of its competitors.

Hans is right. Extremely high iq isolates you from the other people. 120-130 range is better. Not dumb enough to destroy the country. And not intelligent enough to put your views above others.

Yeah I know. Just because it's on Wikipedia doesn't mean it's wrong sheep fucker

Hey, guess what. The majority of you are in the majority.

Not me, though, I'm proud to be 5th percentile.

:^)

No idea though

Shills

Absolute democracy works, but not with absolute suffrage. Then whether it's absolute democracy is up for debate.

The 5% illegals?

How do you even function with IQ below 80?

The issue here isn't whether or not democracy "works"-- it's whether or not its the best system. Overall, it has been monarchies that have lasted the longest, have been the most stable, the least violent, the least war-like, the most consistent in its laws, the most accountable, and have encroached the least on the private property of its citizens.

>Not me, though, I'm proud to be 5th percentile.

I'm not sure you know how percentiles work.

>5th percentile

How's special school going little buddy? Don't worry, I hear they teach percentiles next year.

That's why you have a monarch but also advisors for different subjects like economy, infrastructure or whatever.

Fuck you guys that would have got a healthy chuckle from /sci/.

Monarchies fought wars all the time - just on a smaller scale than nowadays.

I'm happy with the system here.

Monarchy is only good to oppress the majority because you fail to convince them of your ideas.

>/sci/
>Bunch of engineering and maths students

Mate they're not more special than anybody else on this board

will people really preach their own disempowerment?
specially after British SALTY-anti-democracy starting up

the alternative are dictators and bureocrats

> less violent
Topkek

What can I say, you're about to see monarchy in acton.
Absolute ruling power over your country passed down from one family member to another.

You dont get to read these advisors criterea nor have a say on it. You want no power at all, you cuck

> I have a tested IQ of 131
I see similar claims in every virgin neet thread.

Democratic nation states that respect each others sovereignty and integrity, are a global free market of ideas.

If an idea or policy is working within one nation state, this success will be known the world over and slowly but surely this success will be replicated and eventually improved for the good of the whole.

This is how democracy can work, but first we must defeat globalism.

>will people really preach their own disempowerment?

Actually my university is covered in flyers advocating the abolishment of democracy in favor of anarchism.

Which I always find funny, because I can ensure you that those limp wristed hippie cucks would suffer a lot more under anarchy than I would.
Partly because of me.

When they read anarchy, they actually think of communism.

But if those 120+ IQ people decides how the country is run there will be no more gibs to vote for. Those shitskins will be useless for voting then.

Anarchism is extrem individualistic democracy. They probably think they can muh feel politics. Imagine an ensembly with thousands of anarchists with a veto vote each. No political decission can ever be made.

One bad monarch is not nearly as bad as our shitty corrupt system.

They are likely more fit to decide what's best better than the people of the land.
Like someone said, maybe 30% of the people have decent opinions while 70% are retards.

Now our country are run by idiots thanks to the people.
I was one of the 13% who didn't vote for this shit.

>Monarchies fought wars all the time

No, they didn't. That is propaganda. The vast majority of monarchies were relatively peaceful.

And yes you are right. The wars they fought were extremely small scale. They also did not practice total war, as kings and queens were bound by common law which prevented such a thing.

>Monarchy is only good to oppress the majority

Citation needed. The majority of citizens under monarchs were generally left alone, as monarchs had no incentive to oppress them.

Democracy was fine when mass medias and propaganda tactitcs weren't a thing.
Nowadays we should just let everything be run by computers and call it a day, people are fucked.

if you are so smart then you must know that you need to manipulate the masses in order for them to vote the "right" way

You say you dont want to be the 13 %. Peaceful Reformation is better than violent revolution. Violence means youll get raped and killed

This
The universal suffrage is the worst thing that happened to the west

What i meant was i was one of the 13% who didn't vote for mass immigration (which is rape and violence).
I do however agree that peaceful reformation is better of course.

Use your brain nigger. Why would you need to replace democracy with monarchy if the majority is on your side anyway

What type of monarchy do you want Sven? Absolute, constitutional? What are your thoughts on republics? Republics have always been rich.

>The truth, despite being in the minority still being the truth

Masses are easy to manipulate, just take a look on FB and the Syrian kid who died and was found on the Turkish shore
When humans are in group their worst drug is called feelings

Like King John.

IDK if you were just an outcast or dumb or what, but being smart means you can control what average people think. In school if someone didn't understand something of any political nature they asked me, I turned two grades from little libtards to conservatives in no time.

Step 1. Be smart
Step 2. Be charismatic
Step 3. Build a reputation as a smart guy
Step 4. Control political opinion
Step 5. Profit

But I have! I only participate as an agent of chaos.

>Republics have always been rich.
Cos they're full of corrupt Jews.

>like half of the countries in Africa
>rich

>Greece
>rich
etc.

>irrelevant whether an answer is correct

Funny that, the supposed "smartest kids in class" that are paraded on jew propaganda outlets always pushing the incorrect answer based on nothing to illogic, but political and emotional claptrap, "massaged" data.

I was thinking more of Renaissance Italy. The Roman republic faired pretty good as well under a republic.

and the dutch republic

>monarchy
>not militant platonism