In his latest video, controversial vlogger Nas Daily asserts that “The average voter doesn’t know how to vote and that’s why democracy doesn’t work.”
In his video about why this particular system of governance isn’t the best, Nas says that while he thought as a child that giving each person a vote will lead to the formation of a ‘good government’, he now realises he is wrong.

Using an analogy of airplane passengers voting for their captain, Nas tries to illustrate that voters in today’s world are led by emotions and a lack of information. He says:
“Let’s assume you’re going on a plane but before you fly, you and the other passengers must democratically elect a captain. So you get 2 candidates. The first one says if you elect me captain, I will abide by international laws of aviation and fly at 30,000 feet. But the second one says if you let me fly the plane, you can sit in business class. And in today’s world, the average person votes based on emotions and lack of information. So naturally they will vote for the person that promises them a business class.”
With this extremely simplified analogy, Nas asserts that “democracy will elect a terrible person who’s never flown a plane and before you know it, we all crash.”
What Nas fails to highlight here, however, is that it’s expected for the “captain” to brag about what he can offer the “passengers”. These passengers also wouldn’t necessarily know any better.
This is where passengers will rely on the media, to double check with professional bodies on the claims made by the captain. If the passengers are informed about the captains questionable background or track record, there’s less of a change they would elect that person no matter how enticing their promises may be.
That’s what Nas misses – that a functioning democracy has to rely on an informed citizenry to vote for the best candidates. A failed democracy, on the other hand, is one where the press is oppressed and check by non-governmental organisations are curtailed.
Nas goes on to say in his video that running a government is like flying a plane in that it is both difficult and requires years and years of experience. Issues and problems like tariffs, nuclear weapons, geopolitics, healthcare and borders require “real professionals”, says Nas.
Goes back to the plane analogy, he explains that it takes 10 years to be able to fly a plane but in “our government”- presumably Nas’ Israeli home government – anyone can vote in an election and anyone can run for office. “Democracy changes government every four years but the real problems need 20 years to fix,” he adds.
While conceding that democracy is a good idea, he doesn’t think that it is necessarily the best one.
Comparing China and India, Nas notes that China’s central government has lifted 3 million people out of poverty while India’s democratically elected government has 3 million people in poverty.
“I don’t like China but for some reason, they are succeeding,” he says.
Now, here’s another sticky point. While the Chinese government did lift millions out of poverty, the current government is also responsible for killing millions at its beginning thanks to policies that were unilaterally implemented without public consultations.
Mao Zedong has been labelled as a dictator with the most blood on his hands due to the “Great Leap Forward’ in which millions were displaced from their homes and starved to death, some even resorting to cannibalism to survive.
It was the collective power of the people’s voice that caused the Chinese government to stop and think. Now despite being a one party system, even the Chinese government has to ensure to consider public opinion before implementing policies.
Still, he asserts in his video that he doesn’t think dictatorship is the answer. He then suggests alternatives to democracy that could be worth exploring such as technocracy or epistocracy. Technocracy is the system of government which is controlled by technical experts while epistocracy is a system in which the votes of the more politically informed weigh more than those who are less politically informed.
Nas says that the real problem in the world’s biggest democracies now is that “politicians use fake news, lies, and free money to get attention” and the democratic system allows voters to believe in these politicians by the millions.
“We are voting for people who promise us a business class and they don’t even know how to fly.”
He then quotes a famous line, “As someone once famously said, the best case against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.”
Now, the thing about Nas railing against democracy is that he missed out some vital points. Firstly that a democracy requires various tools for it to be effective. A democratic nation isn’t truly democratic if it doesn’t adhere to the rule of law or of it doesn’t protect freedom of the press or free speech. These are key factors that contribute to the effectiveness of a democratic system.
A democracy, with a limited-term mechanism, is also the best way to prevent the rise of a dictatorship. For example, the US has a two-term limit on the presidency which means no one person can be in power for more than 8 years.
In the past, Hitler is often used as an example of how democracy doesn’t work, given the fact that his rise to power occurred in a democratic nation. However, what people tend to forget is that Hitler systematically dismantled tools of democracy which were in place to prevent any one person from gaining absolute power.
The Nazi party grew in power slowly within the democracy of Germany and made calculated, manipulative moves by chipping away at civil rights, individual freedoms, and free press before ultimately becoming the dictatorship that it was.
People also often point to US as an example of the failings of democracy. But again, this isn’t the best example when you consider the flawed electoral college voting system there which means that while one candidate can get the most number of votes (the popular vote) in a presidential election, the winner is ultimately the person who gets the most electoral college votes which is clearly unequally distributed across states.
So while Nas may rail against democracy and it’s failings, we shouldn’t be so quick to dismiss this system, especially not by suing an analogy which doesn’t take into account other factors that are required for a truly democratic system to work.
Nas’ argument against democracy is oversimplified and too narrowed on the issue of how a leader is chosen without considering the cultural and systemic features of the government.
After all, if that’s the only yardstick by which to measure a democracy, then one could argue that North Korea is a functioning democracy given that its leader Kim Jung-Un was re-elected as the country’s Supreme Leader, despite the fact that voters would have been punished severely if they didn’t vote for him.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Business as usual for SPP in Mounbatten – Party's potential candidate revealed

On Wednesday evening (26 September), the Singapore People’s Party (“SPP”) were seen…

Grateful auntie hawker hugs Seetoh for helping hawkers to lower their costs at SEHCs

Founder of Makansutra, K F Seetoh posted a note on his Facebook…

《慈母舰》采访普杰立视频出现政党标志、宣传政策 本地导演质问资媒局:是否抵触《电影法》?

本地电影导演施忠明在脸书发文分享,他今早电邮致函资讯通信媒体发展局(IMDA),向后者询问本地英语网络媒体“慈母舰”制作的一段视频,因其内容呈现政党标志、有政治人物宣传政治课题,是否抵触了《电影法》禁止制作政党政治影片的条文? 新加坡英语网络媒体“慈母舰”(Mothership sg)日前录制视频,采访交通部高级政务部长普杰立医生,内容谈及陆路交通规划和2040年陆路交通发展总蓝图。 由于普杰立的父亲多米尼克(Dominic Puthucheary),曾是社阵政治人物,视频中的快问快答访谈,不免询问普杰立,行动党和社阵,会如何选择。后者则回答选行动党,不过他说很久以前两者过去曾在一起(指社阵领袖原一同创立行动党,惟后来因政见不同离开)。 针对这段视频,施忠明质疑,既然这是“慈母舰”拍摄、并非政府创作的视频,就不能在《电影法》下的第40条文被豁免(只有政府指示或发行的影片可豁免)。 而根据新加坡《电影法》第33条文,私自制作政党政治影片是被违法的。在该条文下,任何人进口、制作、发行或放映政党政治影片即属犯罪,可面对不超过10万元的罚款或监禁不超过两年。 施忠明认为,上述视频里又出现偏驳政治立场、政治人物推介政治课题、出现政党标志等等。 ”敢问有关视频是否已送交(资媒局)进行分级?在电影法第33条文下,会否被归类为政党政治影片?“他在电邮中如是质问资媒局。 2015年民主党拍《白衣牌洗衣粉》视频 此外,施忠明也在贴文中附上2015年的一个案例,那时资媒局指民主党制作的一段诙谐讽刺短片,根据《电影法》定义乃是政党政治影片。 对此民主党领导徐顺全批评资媒局选择性地诠释该法,因为政府也有以漫画的形式,借中国寓言和歌舞等来生动描绘建国一代配套和终身健保等重要政策。…

“人协未涉及裕廊SAFRA歌唱班晚宴” 陈振声向林鼎等三人发更正指示

人民协会副主席陈振声,透过防假消息法(POFMA Office),向人民之声党领袖林鼎等人发出更正指示。 根据该办事处文告,包括林鼎、脸书用户“HenryaceAce”、“Sebastian Ying”以及林鼎等三人,分享贴文误指上月15日在裕廊SAFRA举行的歌唱班团拜晚宴,人民协会或居民委员会(RC)涉及其中。 对此人协副主席陈振声透过该办事处对上述三人发出更正指示。政府网站Factually则澄清,人协和居委会并没有涉及在裕廊SAFRA的晚宴,也没有涉及赞助、筹办或赞助该晚宴,更无权取消之。反之,晚宴是由歌唱导师为他的歌唱班成员举办的。 截至昨日,在裕廊SAFRA的晚宴感染群累计47起病例。2月15日当晚有两场团拜晚宴,共600人出席。主办方也表示并未检测出任何感冒症状或曾出入中国的访客。然而防不胜防,仍出现确诊病例,就连歌唱导师梁凤艺也确诊。 歌唱班晚宴爆发感染群  政府宣布人协部分课程 根据《联合早报》报导,这迫使政府在本月7日宣布,由于上述感染群与人协属下,多个民众俱乐部和居委会的歌唱活动有关,人协采取额外防疫措施,避免病毒进一步传播。受影响的七个民众俱乐部及八个居委会,凡是确诊病例参加过的所有活动和课程都暂停14天。