> 90% of the people voted for Mein Kampf and the Nuremberg rallies and the repudiation of the Treaty of Versailles and Kristallnacht; the mandate was overwhelming.<p>> Since I first published this essay, some people have cited Shirer to different effect, that Hitler actually gained supreme power by an act of the Reichstag on Match 23 1933, and was already dictator at the time of the 1934 elections. This is a quibble. The particular route by which Hitler was able to subvert the Weimar Republic's democracy is far less important than the simple fact that he was able to do so.<p><i>Is it</i> a quibble? I do not know sufficient history, so: how reliable are the results of those 1934 elections, how rigged were they? If the people didn't actually vote, thenh a large part of his argument falls away.<p>I do think we'll end up with anarchism as our form of "government" (at least in some places) far in the future when (/if) we achieve post-scarcity society (a la Culture novels). Or we might get benevolent-AI-controlled governments (might become possible within a few hundred years!), or perhaps a combination of both. Interesting times to live in - and perhaps some or many of us <i>will</i> get to live through those, if Calico or BioViva achieve some of their goals.
(I think the important takeaway isn't what form of government or alternative system might better, but the overwhelming inherent dangers of mob rule. Millions of gullible people wanting something terrible doesn't transmute the morality of genocide.)