Contentious Opinions

There are three topics on which I find myself constantly defending my views.
I believe that all three are cultural mythologies that have been accepted as common truths, causing anyone who challenges their validity to be held up as the worst form of villain.

1) Democracy is the best form of government: The biggest problem I have with democracy is that it is based on the false assumption that all people are equal. When it comes to choosing national leaders, a Nobel laureate has as much influence as an uneducated lout and a humanitarian has the same number of votes as a porno actor.
While I'm all for equal opportunity and equal protection under the law for all citizens, I firmly believe that indiscriminately handing out the power to select national leadership creates a class of leaders who cater to the lowest common denominator.
Just look at Hillary Clinton. Valedictorian at Wellesley and keen progressive thinker, she's forced to pander to the mob and pretend that she adores guns, foetuses and her philandering husband if she wants to compete for the Presidency of the United States.
Or, look at India; Most of our problems can be traced back to the lacklustre leadership that our democracy keeps shoving down our throats. Illiterate villagers, who sometimes peddle their votes for a sachet of hooch, vote in leaders that they can relate to, who in turn presume that good governance involves renaming our big cities (Bengaluru!!?), promoting communal strife and lining their own pockets. The right to vote should not be granted to a citizen who can not read up on the facts about his candidate and analyze them to make an informed decision.
My suggestion? Base governments on private enterprise. The mail clerk in a company does not help to decide who the next CEO will be. The cleaning lady doesn't get to judge how well the VP of accounting is performing. Countries should have a board of directors who earn their place based on their past merits and who in turn hold the CEO accountable for the progress of the country, based on a publicly available quarterly report. No political parties or elections. Just pure results-based decision making.
If a citizen does not like the way the country is being run then he can sell his stock and invest in another country that better suits him. Governments should be forced to work hard to attract citizens.

2) The Golden Age of Man is in our past: This is another one that always riles me up. Every generation believes that the next one is sinking a little closer to hell. There was a time, they claim, that man lived at peace with his environment. He filled his mind and body with pure thoughts and fresh air and his life was blissful and uncomplicated by the terrors and tribulations that plague us today.
What a load of bull crap! Life today has become much simpler and less dangerous than it was even a century ago. Our early ancestors did not enjoy their fresh clean environment because they were terrified of it. They huddled in their caves petrified that some terrible toothy thing would come out of the jungle and drag their children away. Yes it is sad that the big cats are endangered now, but better them than me. Do you think, if you were the last human alive, that a tiger might let you go if he cornered you when he was hungry? 'Go forth and procreate my poor endangered friend. I'll just eat some fruit instead'? Man may be a cancer upon this planet but, as cancer cells, chemotherapy is not in our self interest.
Modern society has made giant strides in health care, equal opportunity, engineering and world peace. Improvements in each of these areas have improved the quality of our lives, while possibly making them a little duller. But if excitement included spending my life eating rodents and dying at the ripe old age of 35 from beriberi, then count me in for all the boredom that modern life can pile on.
My ancestors suffered through ravaging diseases, vicious predators, hostile weather and uncivil neighbors. I thank them for their sacrifices but certainly do not feel guilty about enjoying the benefits of air-conditioning, wall to wall carpeting, refrigeration, plasma television and automobiles. In fact, I think they make me a better human being. The Noble Savage, when not contemplating his freedom from stifling social constraints, occasionally indulged in witch-burning, human sacrifices, slavery, cannibalism and the torture of his enemies. I, on the other hand, am content to simply spend my free time sitting on a couch and watching the Sopranos.

3) Anti-feminism equates to anti-female: This is a touchy one, so let me begin by saying that I think that violence and discrimination against women are serious crimes and should be dealt with in the same manner as would any other serious crimes.
Having said that, I have never been able to see eye to eye with ardent feminists (even the host of them within my family). There are and always will be stark differences between men and women. These differences cause friction, attraction, mistrust, affection, excitement, fear, passion, revulsion and a whole host of other emotions between the sexes. It's completely natural and it's never going to go away.
A guiding principle within the feminist movement is the goal to create a society that puts men and women on a completely equal footing and ignores any differences between the sexes. Aside from being unrealisable, I'm not even sure that this is a worthy ambition. A person's sex is a large factor of their being and it influences who they are, how they react to their surroundings and what they want from life. Your sex defines you as a person more than any other aspect of your self. It is certainly not something to be ashamed of and ignored.
Hardcore feminists, in my mind, are at the intersection of two obnoxious groups; the ideologues, who blindly tout the party line without reviewing every case on its merits, and the champions of political correctness who believe that frank discussion should be shunned and that uncomfortable truths should be repressed. The combination makes it very hard for an outsider to engage them in rational discussion.
A man who cannot respect women should be punished, but a man who cannot understand the feminist perspective should be constructively engaged with.