Socialism versus Capitalism, solved

As a democracy becomes larger and more complex voters rely increasingly on experts to figure out what is in their interest and for every expert there are 10 lobbyists posing as experts. As such there are limits to what can be decided "collectively" before corruption sets in, there is no fruit loop utopian vision that can simply wish away corruption and enable everything to be managed perfectly.

Thus it makes sense for socialists to think like capitalists, to recognise the limits of democracy and not overextend the limited administrative capital of voters, this would probably result in some kind of direct democratic system and strong local government taking care of welfare and public safety with otherwise unfettered capitalism everywhere else.

>>7
Also, yes, I am appreciative that it doesn't use the Inception soundtrack.  Or anything from the Matrix.

But my basic argument is this: people have been speculating that making people more affluent and intellectual would improve society for some time now, and indeed we've improved those areas.  We have not gotten anywhere with the other side of the equation, though, because the hypothesis itself is flawed by a lack of real evidence that changes like these have any sticking power.  Critical thinking does not change how people manage their information and does not address the underlying issue that critical thinking would only work if everyone had the same comprehension and opinions.  Or, alternately, was a tireless inquiry machine who had no other life.  Or, was not interested in seeking out other like-minded individuals as a method of validation.