this post was submitted on 14 Sep 2023
1461 points (93.3% liked)

Memes

45608 readers
1000 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AdamBomb@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

We should select leaders by lottery from a pool of those who have passed a civics exam instead of elections. Maybe that would help with the problem of corrupt people seeking positions of power.

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think you want to give nuclear codes to a random person, though.

[–] endlessbeard@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could it be worse than giving them to power hungry octogenarians?

[–] Sotuanduso@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Yes, I do think giving nuclear codes to a randomly selected literal terrorist could turn out worse than the only other time the US launched a nuclear attack. 5000 nukes to peaceful targets is worse than 2 nukes to targets at war.

If you're going to give power to randomly selected people, you need more checks in place than just "can they pass a civics exam?"

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And who makes sure that the rules aren't broken? Who makes sure the lottery wouldn't be rigged? Your 'solution' is defenseless against corruption. It offers no mechanic to deal with the corrupt. The beauty of democracy and capitalism is that it allows for those who want more power, to achieve it within the system. By that, they will stay within the system and be subjected by the accountability it provides. If your solution allows absolutely no way to stack the cards in your favor, then it will be rejected by all who wish to, and it will crumble before long.

[–] jalda@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

and be subjected by the accountability it provides.

Sure