I must confess, I do not get the relationship between government spending and democracy. I would differentiate between the means of governing and the outcome thereof. An example of a country with the same offers would even outstanding in many regards is Saudi Arabia and they are far from being democratic.
I would argue that the examples you gave are even in favour of real democracy. We all know how much of an influence corporate greed has on politics. It is not labelled corruption, but come on π. You can influence the decision making of the few. You cant influence the decision making of the many once the few are taking out of the equation.
Yes government spending and democracy are different, and yes there is also some form of corruption in politics (via lobbies and even cronyism). I wasn't referring to government spending per se, but the situation where many individual interests are counter productive to the entire society in the long run. In this sense, you can definitely "influence the decision making of the many". Just like in a fire: it's in your best interest to rush to the exit and push everyone aside along the way, although it's collectively much more effective if everyone walks calmly to the exit. In the first example I shared, if >50% have a personal interest in milking the productive forces of a country, these productive forces will either leave or stop working as well which will end up in a global collapse (again, Venezuela and Argentina are prime examples of this mechanism). I think it's good to have many people involved in politics, but not everyone regardless of their background/situation.
We pretty much have opposing views here. Yes education is important, but it is no secret, that not only wealth is inherited, but brains as well. People don`t make decisions that are in the interest of the others. The make decisions that are in the interest of their kind. That is the very role of political parties, although one could debate who is meant by "their kind". "Smart elite" is no more than a symbol and stigma and symbols are best left to the symbol minded. First and for most it is "public relations". Being smart and being intelligent are two different things and being smart doesn`t mean you`re an elite and being an elite doesn`t mean you are smart.
Yes I agree with you again. Like I previously said, I don't have much sympathy for the elites. Not just because they were able to pull themselves on top (good for them), but because they seemingly keep making bad decisions and never face consequences. I was just merely suggesting that non-elites would not necessarily do a better job just because. I've seen (and you probably have too) countless "regular" people have stupid opinions about stuff they clearly know nothing about. Many people vote for things they have an extremely limited understanding of, which maybe is the reason why so many bad elites are propelled forward. I think a better system could be the right of vote if you are a net contributor to society. Just like children don't have the same weight as their parents: if you can't even manage to contribute, you only get to cruise along. π