Democracies must have equilibrium... and the entanglement of politics and information must be minimized.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Democracies are expense-averse and they think in terms of short-term, political interests rather than a long-term interest in stability.
Let me say again that the relationship is asymmetrical: there's no democracy without a market economy, but you can have a market economy without democracy.
Democracy is the only system capable of reflecting the humanist premise of equilibrium or balance. The key to its secret is the involvement of the citizen.
The tendency of democracies is, in all things, to mediocrity.
So I think one can say on empirical grounds - not because of some philosophical principle - that you can't have democracy unless you have a market economy.
Democracies take time.
Democracies, unlike dictatorships, are forgiving and generous, but they cannot survive unless they fight.
Nothing can conduce more to the order and stability of a government than the simplicity of the laws, the proper definition of rights, and their impartial and consistent administration.
The critical question is: How do we ensure that the Internet develops in a way that is compatible with democracy?
When you have an efficient government, you have a dictatorship.