Dear Feltri,
I don't like democracy which, already as a state of fact, stimulates conflicts due to intolerable differences. Revenge for perceived inferiorities. Poor service is provided to those who are envied, differences due to differences in wealth, estrangement from those who feel better, sometimes only due to complexes inherent in one's own weakness. Democracy everywhere supports aggression for opposing rights. And it is as useless as it is harmful. We also see the most harmful but most vaunted aspect of the system: the opposition. It is the gratuitous contrast which in reality has never demonstrated any advantage and always worsens every initiative, modified for useless agreements and pacifications. Thus every project pays tribute to discord.
GB Oneto
Dear GB,
I don't even like democracy when I contemplate its limits and defects as well as distortions of which not only those who administer public affairs but also and above all the citizens, voters and sovereigns are guilty. However, I recognize that it is the lesser of evils, although it does not constitute the greatest of goods. I want to indulge you. Well, let's eliminate that opposition that you define as “harmful”, or deleterious. Let's ensure that everyone has little or nothing and that no one possesses more than the other or others, in order to break down that feeling of envy – if we succeed – which, in your opinion, generates uneasiness and unhappiness, although I believe if anything the opposite, that is, it is personal frustration that produces envy and not the other way around. In any case, let's ban this comparison with others, which also stimulates us to do more and to surpass ourselves first and foremost. We allow only one person to decide for all and that anyone is willing to accept it, so that no conflicts of any kind arise and no agreement is planned, discussed or negotiated. What would be the result of all these operations that you hope for? Have you asked yourself that? Every right and every freedom would be denied. The human being would become number and slave, even beast. A totalitarian power aimed at general leveling would be imposed.
Differences, which do not represent harm, would be prohibited and people would be condemned to be all the same, a shapeless and discolored mass of tormented souls who are forbidden to be what they are, that is, the freedom to be themselves, contributing , each based on their own potential, their own talents and their own ingenuity, towards collective progress, which is not possible where the supreme freedom inherent in democracy is suffocated: that of expression.
I prefer an imperfect democracy to a perfect despotism.