RT @pwang
Voting is not a great way to surface the “best ideas” from a group.
The primary purpose of voting is to maintain legitimacy of the regime in the minds of the losing cadre; you get their “buy in” bc they were part of the “process”
It’s not a tool for collective sense-making; it’s a tool for popular control.
Always has been, always will.
If, somehow, some general sense of “the collective will of the people” can emerge from a voting process, it’s a nice side benefit.
(the following is my own. not pwang's)
1. i had never considered that voting was a tool for legitimacy, instead of how its usually presented as a tool for discovering and implementing the will of the people
2. this kinda makes sense though. we've had plenty of corrupt votes here and no one could dare challenge the government for it. absurdity is a feature of authoritarian regimes, not a bug. 2 + 2 = 5 and no one dares challenge it, dont stick your neck out
@AbstractFairy Have you heard of The Dictator's Handbook? IIRC it's like a primer on selectorate theory. I suggest following it with "Why Nations Fail."
That said, no one else nails the aphoristic style of Hoffer.
@AbstractFairy well FWIW I think it's worth investigating the polar opposite of Hoffer: rah-rah political theory about democracy that's written terribly.
John Dewey has a gazillion essays about the pragmatic value of democracy (not in an idealized state, but in the muddle) and they're all written TERRIBLY. People say Dewey's writing is like wading through oatmeal, or a subway ride to Infinity.
I'd recommend starting with the essay Creative Democracy for a preview of his schtick.
@cosmiccitizen Hoffer's writing is poetry!!! and its sharp af. took me over a year to finish reading True Believer because it was too intense
haven't read The Dictator's Handbook, but i did watch CGP Grey's video of it. read a bit of Why Nations Fail
i'd love to hear more recommendations!