In a previous post, I discussed the phenomena of consensus which I felt was more common within the Eastern tradition. However, I don’t think it’s a good thing for people to sacrifice their actual opinion and thoughts and go along with the group because it destroys important dissenting and minority views that often are the greater truth.
It would be great if all people had good intentions and their natural stances were generally accurate, for the welfare of the group, and in agreement with everybody else, but that’s not always the case. The fairest thing is democracy where people vote in what they think. If by chance there is a consensus, then great, but if not, majority rule should prevail until people with a minority position make a compelling case to the general public long enough that it becomes the new majority stance.
Democracy is exhausting, but still the best way, in my opinion. I still disagree with the elitist set-up of the West which I barely even regard as democratic. Western states have destroyed true fledgling democracies in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, Latin America etc. I support direct democracy (because it’s a natural right and) since technology makes it particularly feasible now. Those who think the public are dumb need to work hard to explain things in a way people can comprehend. Often if it can’t be explained to the average person, one may not understand it well enough themselves.