It is not about the count of people, it is about the diversity that creates problems. 1B people with same religious, ethnic background would do well. Compare that to 1B with hundreds of languages, tens of castes, and at least 10 religions on the other hand are bound to face problems.

It could actually be argued that India has no business being a one country, should have been a union of countries a la the EU.

I mean the us has 350M, what makes it categorically easier in a factor of 5, versus, say, Venezuela, which has a factor of 5 less than the us and is a failed state?

All government is 'challenging'.

It's challenging in the US with a lot less but still the best system we know of

It is better in other countries where there are more than 2 parties who have a chance of getting to power. A coalition government is better than the winner-takes-it-all system.

The two party system creates an us vs them mentality where both are equally bad on most things but there is no real choice for the voters.

I largely agree. It's certainly harder to game a three+ party system into whatever the heck has happened in the US in the past 40 years.

Most people seem to take this as an accolade of democracy, but to me it seems to say a lot about government: that the best form we have doesn't work very well.

aside from a benevolent dictator

> Democracy

It’s the least bad system we have.

It produces average case results in efficiency the most of the time. Other systems produce the best and worst case results more often, in efficiency, specifically due to their lack of inclusivity. We know its better to have less cooks in the kitchen, you just better pray you have good cooks.

Socrates might've disagreed. I can see why mob rule gives the illusion of consent when manufactured consent is needed. It's simpler to not have popularity contests for corrupt officials and instead have randomly-assigned professional administrators.

Given that consent can be manufactured, I have a theory on where most of the truly smart people are, they are the ruling rich oligarchs. 'Democracy' is a charade to keep the mobs pacified and given them an illusion of electing the leaders they desire.

How is it then that scientists, engineers, and inventors rarely profit from their inventions while it's mostly the swindlers who do?

Perhaps it's the cleverest (in the negative connotation), most sociopathic, and those who've inherited it who are the oligarchs.