Kuangyi (Guagua) Bo

Watching the midterms, I’m reminded how often, in years of discussing “democracy,” in and out of classrooms and in the West and in China, people tend to argue past each other with great conviction because they are taking about different things. I find it useful to separate the question into four. (This isn’t original; it would be familiar to anyone who’s done political theory 101.) First, democracy as a theory of legitimacy. The claim is that legitimate power comes from the consent of the governed. Voting is the act of consent, so democracy is the basis of self-rule. If you happen to be in the minority or had a limited menu to choose from, that’s just the necessary compromise. (Per Locke, Rousseau) Second, democracy as a system of accountability. Regular elections and rival parties are supposed to keep abuse of power in check and prevent the formation of tyranny. (Per, eg, Schumpeter) Third, democracy as a talent selection mechanism. How good is it at surfacing the competent and deserving? How meritocratic is it? (~Schumpeter, Dahl) Fourth, democracy as an institutional arrangement. Be it presidential/parliamentary, federal/unitary, how well does it secure the ultimate societal goals of justice, fairness, and prosperityV How well does it protect the sphere of the individual from both the state and the majority? This goes beyond the popular democratic will, for it’s as much about the restraint of it as its expression. (Madison, de Tocq, Mill etc). Whatever the outcome tonight, if one wants to read it as a verdict on democracy, be clear what you mean.

Already gave up hope on @AirCanada having @Starlink . But now AC adding a compulsory ad screen for free internet you already qualify for is just criminal. Who came up with this daft idea?

i was curious about the composition of commenters on my posts. So I made a grok bot. feel free to check out x.ai/bot/37ckm2zchL3Gr57l8ux… Sample of 2,230 replies and quotes on my last six posts (~84%): Criticism of the CCP: 1,282 (57%) Neutral: 354 (16%) Supportive: 216 (10%) Personal attacks with no political content: 153 (7%) Mockery: 141 (6%) Logical counter-arguments: 51 (2%) Other: 33 (1%)

扫了下近期跟我贴的，乍看有些回复很擅长回应我没说过的话或用新型的逻辑，以至于我无奈回应了😂。看来还是要等机会真人辩论才有意义。 为了更客观的看X平台上反馈评估，我做了一个Grok bot. 大家也可以试试。 x.ai/bot/37ckm2zchL3Gr57l8ux… 近期六条帖子抽样分析了2,230条(~84%)： 对中共的批评：1,282（57%） 中性：354（16%） 支持性：216（10%） 无政治内容的人身攻击：153（7%） 嘲讽：141（6%） 逻辑性反驳：51（2%） 其他：33（1%）