"...Even the possibility I just mentioned can exist in theory. But how can the opponent's debaters prove that this assumption does dominate the mainstream in real life? You should know that assumptions are just assumptions, and the spiral of silence is just an insignificant non-mainstream theory in contemporary media and cannot replace social reality.

After the Olympian was elected president, American people were generally excited. This is an indisputable fact. Anyone with a little knowledgeable eyes will not deny this. The opponent's debater just tried to prove that the freedom of media brought by the Internet can allow a few people with strong desires to control the majority of people without desires. Isn't it a straightforward mistake?"

The second and third debaters at Xiangjiang University have rushed to organize a new counterattack and tried to fight Feng Jianxiong.

However, from the perspective of counterattack, it can also be seen that they have given up the refutation of the point that "the standard for promoting democracy lies in the opinions of more than the opinions of relatively few but strong people." They only focus on refuting "Whether the generalization of free speech brought about by the Internet really leads to the disadvantage of "leading the rhythm and tying" and cannot truly express and contagious public opinion."

Seeing that the other party had taken a step back in momentum, Feng Jianxiong naturally became more relaxed: "That example is just because it is more vivid, so it can be used as an introduction. Because of the investigation, it is difficult for both of us to come up with sufficiently convincing specific public opinion data..."

The junior defenseman of the Xiang family immediately refuted: "We can come up with detailed data - the final election vote count is a result, and the O'Hye Horse did win more than 15 percentage points!"

Feng Jianxiong spread his hands: "But you can't prove the views of those who didn't vote because they think 'I might not change anything' - in the past few years, the number of voters in the United States has never exceeded 60% of the legal voters, including this time, most black people have been circulated to vote. In the past, the turnout rate was only about 40%.

The third debater of Xiang immediately seized the details and asked: "It seems that the opponent's debater doesn't even know the basic common sense that 'rights can be waived, and obligations must be fulfilled'. It is precisely because democracy is a right that people who are indifferent can abstain. Abstention means that they think that both candidates are the same. It doesn't matter. How can the final election result not represent their will?"

Feng: "But it doesn't matter if you can't prove that these people are really in their hearts, or because they are influenced by social networks and even the previous generation of media, they mistakenly think that 'even if I go, I won't be my vote'. If some people who mistakenly think of themselves as niches are deceived to exercise their rights, can that be called a promotion of democracy?

In this way, what the opponent's debater believed to promote democracy was to create momentum and deter it first, and then everyone received profound ideological education. In the end, harmony was called **”

The sophistry behind is too dissonant, but it is nothing more than just being quainted with words. Both sides talk about the truth and no one can give up the data, so they can only give up.

Feng Jianxiong seized the opportunity and began to give his own example and refute it in depth.

For example, he has detailed data to prove that some turning points in history are actually a small group of people in the global scope. He just used the "swalking method" to snowball a few opponents at every specific moment...

However, it seems that these examples are even more dissonant, so stop.

...

After an indescribable process, the game ended.

Anyway, Feng Jianxiong successfully explained that democracy is a shroud of saints depicted beautifully, but no one has actually done it before.

At best, it is just an interest group leader.

The reason why those peasant uprisings in history was that they blindly won over the real majority at the beginning, destroying the structure of the food chain, resulting in the lack of a sustainable exploitation chain after killing the rich households. In the end, they could only collapse themselves, and a small group of people with strong 10% to 20% of strong execution were separated from the inside, enslaving the remaining 80% to 90%, maintaining the ecological balance of the social system.

Darwin told us that the total weight of wolves on a grassland cannot exceed 10% to 20% of the total weight of the sheep. No matter how many wolves are, they will starve to death and wolves eat wolves. If there are fewer ones, not only will the wolf eat well, but the sheep feel less painful.

This data actually has exquisite scientific principles, and it was later verified by society - for example, Beibang, which was in the first army, had more than 1 million soldiers and only 20 million people. Each soldier has a wife, children and parents, so the ruling class has 5 million (considering that soldiers in Beibang are senior professions and have a very hereditary motivation, then it would be better to count two soldiers from a family of five, and it would be a discount).

After this discount, it will basically be a ruling class of three to four million, just five to one with slaves, with a golden ratio. No matter how high the ratio is, all countries will be destroyed and have no sustainable development.

Of course, although interest group owners are not as good as the fantasy "true. democracy", they still have some comparative advantages over dictatorship from some perspectives.

The discordant nonsense will not be expanded.

The advancement of technology, especially the advancement of media technology, will only make the Matthew effect more obvious, make the silence spiral more concentrated, and allow a few rhythm dogs to achieve greater results and suppress more indifference to the public.

Just like on some novel websites, people who like to read novels are not necessarily mainstream. It’s just that novels are doing miserable in real life, so their expressions on the Internet are more arduous. People who live decent in real life are often more decent, don’t have that strong desire to express themselves, and are unwilling to spend money.

So after a long time, the supply side also adapted. By chance, people with knowledge forced to stop reading online articles and entered the spiral of silence. They felt that online articles were so naive, so they were flashy.

But if you think that "school beauties, bodyguards, soldiers, kings and dogs" is the mainstream of China, then people will definitely not recognize it, and that is just the mainstream of losers in real life.

In the era without the Internet, minority but similar opinions will never have the opportunity to gather so easily, and then form a majority of opinions in small communities. As long as their desire to express themselves strongly, they can make the community bigger step by step, and finally make pesticide milk powder the mainstream of society.

"Feng Jianxiong is really Solzhenitsyn, whoever he catches, is scolding him. Back then, Solzhenitsyn scolded the Soviet Union and the United States. According to Feng Jianxiong's meaning, dictatorship and democracy are cursing him. What kind of faction is he?"

"But he has a personality to speak. It is probably impossible to trap him by relying on a preset standpoint."

——
Chapter completed!