democracy?

this re-allocation of power would be especially troublesome. Historically, we've tried to keep the budget and the military separated and checked (Prez controls the armed forces, but congress declares war*, Congress assigns the budget but the prez vetoes it.), when both are unified in one font of power, even one composed of numerous elected officials, it's a straight road to corruption...well, it's a straight road to EVEN MORE corruption. You'd definitely want the armed forces under the control of one official with unquestioned authority, armed forces, especially in our day and age, need quick, fast-acting decision makers

As for the question of fascism, it's been discussed, some call this outlook the "dangerous idea" of our time. (a "dangerous Idea" being something that is immesnly unpopular and anti-PC but will nevertheless be vindicated by history...see: heliocentrism, interracial dating). I'd suggest reading "the Glass Bees", an acid-trippy sort of sci-fi book written just after WWII, which along with being pro-fascist (I think), seems to predict robotics, genetic engineering, and the internet.

In an age when people can lob bombs halfway around the world, and with our historic concern for human life (Ancient sumerians would routinely defeat the army, then De-feet the townspeople) it seems dumb to trust the reactionary "majority" with the future of the world, as they've proven themselves to be poor custodians of the future.

I'm skeptical of that view, however. If your view is that the overwhelming majority of people are mindless sheep, you eventually have to come around to the realization that the one man you put in power is either one now, or is going to be at some point in the future.











*We have found a neat little way to circumvent this in the past few decades, it's called "effectively breaking the law like scumbag weasels."