Winner Doesn’t Take All

Tuesday, July 1st, 2014

In places like Iraq and Afghanistan, you have traditional councils — called shura, jirga, etc. — where the clan chiefs gather to settle issues, Greying Wanderer notes, and they operate on consensus:

In an environment where nepotism is the norm, decisions must be made by consensus, because in that kind of environment a winner-takes-all system results in the winner literally taking all and dividing it up among his relatives and allies.

In the West you can (or could) have a winner takes all system because the winner doesn’t literally take all.

So it seems to me the tectonics of clannishness requires a different national-scale democratic model built around consensus and not the western model. The western winner-takes-all democratic model on clannish tectonics is simply a recipe for civil strife.


  1. Lucklucky says:

    That is why socialism in essence is tribal.

  2. Rollory says:

    The West has mistaken the surface appearance for the reality. It thinks that representative government is the cause of prosperity, and doesn’t understand everything that underlies it. Which is why it’s being lost.

Leave a Reply