“stomp” is a bit exaggerated... Democracies are usually more economically efficient, whinch in the long run means more productive power for tech progress or weapons/munitions manufacture. But the catch is “the long run” there is some history of tribal/ dictatorial states distabalizing democracies and “winning” if they do it quickly and ferociously enough. Or even just ferociously.

A very good source of info about a lot of the powers and incentives in something like this is the “rules for rules” youtube video from cgp grey https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs

That depends on how you reckon things. It sounds like an extremely unwarranted axiom routinely disproven by normal world events.

I don't see the semi-functional United States outcompeting dictatorial slave labor economies. If your metric is how much value you can offer to huge multinational companies, it's plain that democratic societies are completely rejected and not even in the running.

'your investors' may very well demand completely inhuman behavior, because there's a cost to humanity, ethics and decency. If you insist on being decent and the flow of capital is completely frictionless it will all bypass you without a second thought. You will be actively choosing to not be the lowest-cost, highest-return option.

This is so contrary to facts that I'm confused about where to even start rebutting.

I guess I would just encourage people to look at where multinational companies tend to be created, tend to be headquartered, and tend to get most of their revenue.

> Obviously a functional democratic society will stomp a dictatorial one on pretty much any axis you care to think of.

A lot of Singaporeans might disagree there. Enlightened dictatorship can be really good however the probability of a having a great dictator is extremely low.

A lot of Singaporeans would disagree with you, but they know better than to speak out.

> a functional democratic society will stomp a dictatorial one on pretty much any axis you care to think of

That's correlation, not causation. A lot of the "best" democracies were functioning well before democracy arrived. The main issues that make countries "bad" (bad blood between groups, mistrust of authority, warlords, force majeurs, etc) are not directly related to the form of government.

> We can say "democracy is better", but there are instances where democracy doesn't work.

Just a book recommendation, but for people interested in learning more about these kinds of situations, I'd really recommend Amy Chua's "World on Fire."