Hacker News Reader

Comment by baron3dl | Hacker News Reader

The Two Santas strategy <https://www.milwaukeeindependent.com/thom-hartmann/two-santa...> is the American implementation of the famous Alexander Fraser Tytler quote: “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”

View on HN

That is extraordinary insightful. It's frightening to see how correct it is, and to recognise that Europe and the US are both well past the abundance phase.

There would be abundance if the trillionaires were happy with 5% returns and invested in housing instead of gambling (and being bailed out eventually) on "Super Intelligence".

Cultural inability to advance?

One-liner bot?

It reminds me of the quote from G. Michael Hopf:

> Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.

Good times have made weak men. People unwilling to stand up for our values. Afraid to even declare what we stand for. Afraid to be proud of our traditions and what makes our way of life superior and worth defending and fighting for. These weak people will vote for candidates who demoralise us and weaken us and ensure our demise.

Here's a blog post by Bret Devereaux with an examination of why that theory is specious:

https://acoup.blog/2020/01/17/collections-the-fremen-mirage-...

Does Bret argue that good times do not create weak people? The blog reads as "good times create pretty great military power", which is something else.

It feels like we're seeing a bit of a turn in things... we'll see.

I was struck yesterday by reading Huey Long's "Share Our Wealth" proposals from the 1930s in the midst of the Great Depression.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_Our_Wealth#Proposed_legi...

One characteristic of democracy is that it is ever-rewritten by those who strive to change it and vote. (Also, occasionally assassination, in Long's case)

Today we are dominated by weak men afraid of what a greater mass of weak men might say about them or accuse them of.

The lion doesn't concern itself with the opinion of sheep.

It doesn't sound like this breaks the cycle. It just sounds like it's advocating for the dictatorship part of the cycle.

If you knew my full beliefs, it's the exact opposite. The Framers were a group of such people unafraid to chart a new path.

They enshrined a number of rights that are under attack by both ends of the political spectrum.

It's the failure to break the cycle which leads to dictatorship, and is unequivocally not the solution to problems of today.

You're welcome to share your full beliefs. It might clarify your point, and strengthen the perception of your position.

And the eternal hope that they’re the lion

Historians fairly uniformly think that this adage is trash.

I'm so tired of this quote. It's gets used by douches to justify their douchyness all the time.

The quote is bullshit. It is not consistent with observable reality where population under pressure breaks up.

> From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury

Please show me that moment, is it in the room with us right now?

On the contrary, giving money to the public would actually help the economy, but people continuously vote for politicians who are (ostensibly) “careful” with the money.

The rich and the corporations are the ones currently the one looting the treasury, not the common folk like the quote implies

This is some quaint editorial work, and compelling, but this totalizing historical assertion is smuggling a lot it assumptions into the conversation.

Plus I don’t think history plays this a-to-b. Counter examples are out there, Ottoman empire, Assyrian empire, Spartans.

Otherwise known as anacyclosis. It's a cycle.

that 200 years average does not sound correct. and so the rest actually.

> The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

Sounds like total bullshit. I briefly googled it and apart from AI also telling me that it was total bullshit, the first list I found split the Roman empire in two so it would neatly match the hypothesis!

Someone just thought of that and then found data to fit their neat idea.

>> The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

> Sounds like total bullshit.

You're right. It more like an avg of 118 years (median 73), not 200, depending on what you mean by "greatest" ofc. The Ancient Romans, US, and Dutch pulling that average up and 1/3 of historically modern continuing democracies having a short lifespan being founded around WW2, pulling it down.

The Roman Empire was not stable for an uninterrupted period of time. It's conceptually called a single state for simplicity, because such a large period of time and area of land naturally had instability (less than current Europe, granted). The Roman Empire democratic government lasted about 487 years before falling into autocratic rule.

> before falling into autocratic rule

Did that mean it was no longer a great civilization?

Also I would argue that a civilization that only lasts 100 years is not great almost by definition. Where's your data?

> Did that mean it was no longer a great civilization?

The question was about the average lifespan of a democracy (or any derivation, like a republic).

This is a variation of talking past the subject. eg https://www.instagram.com/p/DY2DRKDhqaa

> The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

republican government. I wouldn't call that a democracy, not in the modern sense of the term.

> they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.

It isn't 2024 any more and you cannot repeat that election campaign.

Under the Trump administration, nothing goes to the voters and everything goes to BigTech, the MIC and Trump's friends.

Yeah, the quote comes across as the rich + elites upset that the poors want government programs too.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com