And this, "I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gases: gases can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected."
And just in case you couldn't tell, he confirms his inner monster: "I think a curse should rest on me — because I love this war. I know it's smashing and shattering the lives of thousands every moment — and yet — I can't help it — I enjoy every second of it."
So what, am I supposed to look up to this man and accept that Mob Rule is the best way to govern just because he says so?
But whatever man, people will just keep believing what they're believing. But at the end of the day, those who would use violence to enact their own ends will continue doing so.
No.
> You have some fantastic idea for government that doesn't involve pissing off anyone?
No.
> What the hell is wrong with you?
I'm sure lots of things.
> Are you some wackjob hiding in a bunker somewhere plotting the downfall of the governemnt?
No.
If all you can muster are insults, then there's really nothing left to say.
1. It ensures that absolute idiots cannot come to power
2. It reduces conflict ( 'You don't like what the government is doing? Too bad, you voted for it!' ).
Which is exactly why the phrase "tyranny of the majority" exists, and why "democracy" is just a euphemism for "mob rule" at the end of the day.