Originally Posted by
Oracle
But, in a theoretically perfect environment, democracy becomes inefficient. If every individual is a perfectly informed citizen, and each politician is motivated and population-driven, then democracy slows down effective governance because the very same tools intended to balance powers will also slow governance. Election cycles require the efforts of politicians to be divided away from their core job of governance. Furthermore, actions within a democracy are subject to scrutiny from the population of which it serves, which further bogs down governance, as informed decisions are not reached overnight. Also, democracy is built around compromise. Unless every politicians can agree on the right course of action to take 100% of the time, then the very nature of democracy will slow governance because compromise will be necessary for progress to be made among dissenting parties. And if all politicians did agree on the same course of action 100% of the time, you might as well do away with democracy and replace it with a monarchy, as it would functionally be accomplishing the same thing.
There are different forms of democracy however, and some forms get rid of politicians entirely. The system you've described is a representative democracy, a democracy containing people that we elect to represent us (politicians). Right now (just about every) representative democracy in the world is a democracy in name only, they're essentially oligarchies (controlled by the political elites).
A representative democracy unfettered by corruption might be impossible. If it were possible (through removing representatives), would we even want that? Look around at your average fellow citizens. These are not the people you want deciding geopolitics.
What's your opinion on direct-democracy (or some similar variant)? Democracy that removes any corrupt middlemen and goes straight to the will of the people.
Originally Posted by
Oracle
A political system never succeeds, in my eyes, unless it can meet the necessities of everyone it is supposed to represent and protect. If a person at the bottom of society can go through life without basic existential worries, then we've given that person the bare minimum of decency.
I agree that for system to be called the best, best means the best for everyone.