Individuals are not by definition unable to be more just and moral than a group. The dictatorship of the majority isn't the most just way to go about, either.
I just think it tends to be easier to question the government when there are open elections. But then again, justice is not determined by the form by which a leader is chosen, but rather by the mechanics that protect justice and freedom in all levels of government, at all times.
I may favor democracy, but I also don't let myself be fooled that simply having a guy be elected makes him necessarily legitimate and just.
mmm... I think when you said just, you mean good? It's true Individuals are not by definition unable to be more just and moral than a group... but if you are trying to 'organize' the living of a group, it's only just they decide their own destiny... maybe not every time the better choice, but THEIR choice.
All democracies have problems, (as everything made by humans) but they can be solved by pacific ways. A dictator only can be 'solved' by his death... the fast way usually cost too much blood and the slow way too much sufferings and years.
In a democracy, people can be fooled to elect the 'wrong' guy? Give them education! The more educated the people are, the less able to be fooled, they will.
Someone can abuse of his position? Make efficient 'control' procedures. A good democratic government system is the one who every power is controlled by another.
In the democracies, the government election is not only the 'just way', It's the 'main' system of control. The people have the right and the duty to try to chose the better government possible for their country. If the people don't want (or can't) to do this, the democracy will crumble and an eager 'patriot/saviour' will take control.
But all of this is OOT... or we are discussing Aurvandill government?
