|
I see a problem in your arugment, Art. If authoritarianism is necessary because we are "essentially unable to observe, scrutinize, and comprehend things in a sufficiently self-critical manner...", then who will the leaders be if they are susceptible to the same faults as other humans?
Authoritarianism requires repressive measures to control a population at the hands of an elite group. This group determines what is appropriate for its subjects. If they are unable to comprehend things in a sufficiently self-critical manner, then doesn't it go that their leadership will be severely flawed?
Also, there are many cases in which an authoritarian form of government has retarded economic growth. Think Franco's Spain, or the Phillipines.
While authoritarian governments will sometimes tend to ignore the actions of individuals, it can also lead to highly repressive actions - Singapore's strict set of public laws. While some may view forced manners and ordered society as ideal and even preferential to what we experience in the United States, it does so at the cost of culture, I believe.
__________________
"I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses
|