Hans-Hermann Hoppe turned 66 two days ago, and here I’ll rebound on one of his key ideas: the mistrust (to say the least) about democracy. To him, democracy is a form of communism with less violence. Not totally wrong, I’d say, since it is a system that, contrary to a market, imposes to all the mean behaviour at best, and minority behaviours most generally. Tocqueville spoke of the “tyranny of majority” in the second part of his “On democracy in America”.
Now, if you admit that democracy is bad BUT the best we have until society really is free, you have to think about the relation between that so called “power of the people” and the monopolies invented by the state. If you think that it’s normal that people can decide who will be the boss of the whole group, who can wage war on others, including nuclear war, it is because you think that, at least on average “people” will make right decisions. Not that they will converge to acceptable decisions, that they will learn and adapt until their decisions are satisfactory, no, that they will by right every time, on the first try. Or at least that the aggregate decision (simple mean, no weighting scheme) will be so. That’s mighty strong, don’t you think? Actually, that strikes me as way stronger that the strong form of market efficiency in the Fama sense… How can you be “for democracy” and “fear that markets may take wrong decisions”?
And then, having granted that power based on those implicit assumptions (unless the state actually hopes that they will make bad decisions, cause wars, crises, massacres and the like… ) you say that these same people are too stupid to have to right to choose their health insurance or lack thereof?
It’s, at best, not really coherent. Like most (all?) things going against freedom and leaning left, I’d say.