Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
Congratulations on a complete failure to read posts. I suggest you reread the last two sentences.
It's not my fault you contradict yourself from one sentence to the next. Plus your ideas are still divorced from reality, at different times some of the cleavages in society have been too big to just smooth over, whether ethnic, class, or whatever.

The reality is that a state functions best when it has a relatively homogenous population. I think its funny to see a Frenchman like Louis arguing otherwise, given the roots of republicanism with Rousseau, when he thought France at his time was far too big and diverse to function as a republic. Of course, over the centuries with centralisation etc this has changed, and IMO now the nation states of western Europe are the natural level at which the state should exist.

Anyway, the problem with democracy is that is fails to represent the nation as a whole. It almost always represents a single class, or prioritieses one ethnic group or religion or whatever over another. Given that minority rights in democracies only exist to prevent an outright tyranny of the majority, minorities will never be ideally represented in an a democracy. They will have basic rights, but they won't have a real voice.

One classic example of this today, especially in Britain, is what you see with the white working-class. Democratic institutions completely fail to represent them, because the growing middle class suffocate their voice in a democratic system. IMO we need a more direct way to represent their interests, screw democracy. If you don't like that, just remember that the vote is not really valuable in itself, it is simply a means to an end - representation. If democracy fails to deliver that, it's not serving its purpose.

IMO corporatism is the best solution, kind of going back to the three estates idea - reserve a certain number of seats for groups that would otherwise not be represented in a democratic system. Say 40% of the population are working-class, and 60% middle-class... in a democracy, the middle-classes get 100% control of the government. If they have a majority they can do what they like (besides the basic rights given to minorities). The working-class have their rights but no voice, no power in government.

The only solution is power-sharing, with the interests of all the nation being represented regardless of whether or not they are a minority. Give each an equal voice. Every individual citizens should have the same voice in the government, instead of it being reserved to one interest group just because it is composed of more individuals.

This should be complemented by the fact that the nation should be the natural level for economic life. It is very much connected with the political sphere, since all democracy does is preserve the dominance of the international capitalist elite. People might complain about basing the market on national borders, but at the end of the day they do the same with the political sphere, and all good lefties will appreciate the two have to be connected for a succesful economy. Certainly, I support a strong welfare state.

In short, national socialism ftw.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
I think that this post might just somehow evoke a Godwin. But no Vuk, I do not support that German political movement from the mid 20th century.