DBWI: A Democracy?

You mean like what some of the Greek city states used to have, right?

*quick check*

Yes, that's it. Seems rather...chaotic...for my taste.

As for a PoD, I guess Athens & co. don't get beaten to a pulp (repeatedly) by their neighbours. Better military leadership would help.
 
It would collapse within a month. The mob could never run a state. They're too ignorant, too venal. Much better that the world be ruled by the mob's intellectual and moral betters. Like me, for instance. Myself being a Baron of Francia, why should my voice be considered the same as the voices of the vulgar masses?
 
Are you one of those anarchists that assassinated Papal Lord Theobald?

Your kind should be loocked up.

OOC: I don't know if the freedoms that allows the Internet to exist as we know it without democracy
 
Are you one of those anarchists that assassinated Papal Lord Theobald?

Your kind should be loocked up.
Oh, absolutely. Surely the monitoring protocols will have flagged this silly line of discussion by now.

I feel somewhat filthy even posting here, but it's best to dissuade these quaint traitors of their foolish delusions before they can sprout. And certainly the Infoshare is the wrong venue for this sort of sedition and blasphemy. This network is for exchanging economic communications, not pontificating about your fantasies of rebellion, @The Grudge Keeper!

I should expect you shall be receiving a visit from the Guard sooner than later.
 
REMEMBER THE CALENDAR MARTYRDOMS

INFORMATION WILL BE FREE

Search INFODUMP 555, Terms "DEMOCRACY; KHORA; NEW INTELLIGENTSIA"

God is dead. Open your mind. Anarchy and a New Sunrise will come sooner than you know.
 
I could only see it happening if "democracy" was redefined to mean something akin to the "general will" and that it would be used to talk broadly about forms of government with some sort of popular element, like the franchise. Otherwise, I think it's rather difficult for a democratic nation to really establish itself- how does a country run with power devolved so much to the people that there isn't really a central government to speak of? It might work at a small scale, but the Paris uprisings, the Digger movement, and revolutionary Catalonia, were all eventually crushed by reactionary forces. I guess it's an interesting alternative to Socialism, but I feel like Democracy never really had the same draw or staying power.
 
Last edited:
Before I'm banned, I just want to share additional information with anyone interested. Firstly, anyone can mask their Infoshare Account using an Automated Network Scrambler (ANS) - further information can be found at 11.332.503.1910 INFODUMP 777. If anyone is interested in learning further information about the Calendar Organization or anarchic collectivism, we can be contacted at 22.344.993.1128 CHAT 333 - as long as your identity is Scrambled, you are in no danger. The Courts cannot pursue you.


The Crowns and the Ecclesiastical Courts Union and its Federates do not control the whole world. Rebellions in many places throughout history have been successful. India, Rio Plata, and New Denmark have all seen successful uprisings which have forced the Lords to come to terms. There are places in this world which are entirely free of monarchical despotism as well, geographically isolated and protected by the power of New Sunrise. Zeeland and Tibet are perfect examples of this.

Many of these rebellions have been inspired by the very information you seek, Grudge Keeper - indeed, the "Heathen/Forbidden Works" such as Aristotle's Politics and Constitution of Athens have been vital inspirations to the modern thinkers of the New Intelligentsia. Our war is an ancient one - the struggle of free thinkers against the systems that have ensured hierarchy and propaganda govern our daily lives.

We believe that all men and women have the right to be free to do as they please, so long as they hurt nobody. We believe that no man and woman has the right to own property, be it land or chattel. We believe that freedom is an inevitable process which will destroy the old order. We believe that innovation is not a crime. We believe that no artist should be imprisoned, no philosopher jailed.

No God, No Kings, No Courts.
 
Sounds pretty disgusting. I don't think anyone would want to live in a tyrannical hegemonical state like Athens.

This is almost ludicrously ASB.
 
This slander against Athens is based in propoganda and lies! all Athenians were perfectly free! It was the perfect place, which is why the Monarchs destoyed it!
 
Going back to the original question (I'm not commenting on this radical nonsense): this depends on how strict your definition of "democracy" is. If you mean like they had in Athens, with every citizen coming together and voting on laws, then no: there's no way that could've been done on a large scale, it would just be too chaotic. However, during the 1700 and 1800s, there was an ideology essentially advocating for for a system in which the citizens hold elections to choose lawmakers, who then run the country (basically the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland if it was run by the House of Commons). Some scholars classify this as a form of democracy, although its historical proponents preferred the term "republic" (like in Ancient Rome) and explicitly denied that it was a democracy. However, I'm not sure how sustainable this form of government would be, since a popular demagogue could easily get himself elected to top offices and become a de-facto king (see: Julius Caesar, Augustus).
As for a POD, I would strongly recommend the American Rebellion, where Britain's American colonies tried to declare independence and form a government based on Republican values. I don't know how to make them win without ASB, though, or how such a government would exist without eventually falling apart or being invaded by another European empire.
 
The democracies in Greek city states were run by citizens who physically walked to the city center and voted. This can only work in a city state, and the city can't even be that populous. Even Aristotle pointed this out. Rome was never a democracy, and the democratic elements of its political system disappeared under the strain of running an empire.

I have to look up what "the House of Commons" is, and its nothing more than a group of ordinary citizens hand picked by the King or Queen at the time to advise them. It has never met more than infrequently, for short periods. Apparently an obscure nineteenth century radical philosopher, John Stuart Mill, proposed that localities elect representatives to the House of Commons, but the idea has always been regarded as a joke and strictly speaking that is not democracy anyway. What you might be able to get are more frequent plebiscites.
 
All these ideas about giving power to the mob seem to ignore the fact that noblesse oblige exists. As people of station, we have obligations to the common people. But not all common people have the life experience or the education to govern themselves. Isn't it better that the weak and the incapable be protected by the elites, who know what is best for them, rather than forcing such unfortunates to survive on their own? And where does this business of governing oneself end? Shall the government simply change its ideas every day depending on which citizens walk to the town square, as one might change his or her breeches? Shall we force people to walk across the land to the town square to vote? And if you were to choose lawmakers, how could they truly represent each man?

This silly idea simply encounters too many hurdles of logistics. There's a reason these republican treasons are considered impossible. Do give them up.
 
OOC: I love how every world where democracy as we know it doesn't exist is automatically an Orwellian hellhole, as if we didn't find any other non nightmarish method.
 
OOC: That doesn't mean it's not fun to roleplay an Orwellian hellhole. ;)
OOC: Fair, I suppose. It just eventually gets old. I mean, there was the other DBWI thread about the French Revolution where its failure somehow invalidated the existing democratic institutions in England as well as the enlightenment reforms across Europe.
 
OOC: I love how every world where democracy as we know it doesn't exist is automatically an Orwellian hellhole, as if we didn't find any other non nightmarish method.

OOC: Something has to keep democracy (as we know it) from developing. Given that deliberative and consultative assemblies are actually fairly common throughout history - from the Icelandic Althing, to the Anglo-Saxon Witan to the Estates General of France, and more besides (and that's just Europe) - something has to prevent said assemblies from becoming powerful enough to demand that the leader needs their permission to act. The best way of preventing them is tyranny, and the leader having a source of income independent of said body's control.

Non-democratic* utopias may be interesting, and all well and good in theory, but I don't see them lasting very long, human nature being what it is.

*At least, non-democratic as we would understand it.
 
What is all this hatred and bile against our Holy Despot?

Even Plato and Socrates, arguably the founders of Western Philosophy and the most profound figures of Athens spoke against Democracy; Socrates believed that Democracy had the nasty tendancy to lead to a Demagogue: someone who said things just to get the support of the people, rather than someone that is qualified to actually make decisions. I'll use an analogy similar to one used by Socrates; imagine a Candy businessman and an Apothecary are fighting for the presidency. The Candy man says "I'm a great man; my Candy brings you all joy and it tastes good!" while the Apothecary says "I'm a doctor, and sometimes I must hurt you through surgery to make you feel better. Also, stop eating Candy. Its bad for you." You can imagine who the uneducated ruffian would vote for, all in their pursuit of 'freedom' even when it is detrimental to themselves. Socrates himself was killed by vote on trucked up charges. The people making decisions should be the people most qualified to make said decisions, not the people who are most liked. Plato took this one step further, promoting a "Philosopher King" much like our Holy Despot today: the enlightened person(s) should hold power, as they can look past the traditional and short sighted views of the unlearned proletariot.

Democracies could work, but the voting population would have to be intelligent enough to best know who is most qualified to make decisions and sadly, that just isn't in the cards. Democracies sooner or later will fail when the people elect someone based on who they like and not who is most qualified; resulting in the collapse of the state in question due to the inept nature of the elected leader.

Which is why I am a full yet not fervent or overzealous supporter of our Holy Despot. Freedom is Slavery to the whims of the uneducated masses rather to the educated minority.
 
Last edited:
Top