My solution is to deny the existence of a paradox. Every form of government has benefits and shortcomings. This applies to aristocracy and democracy just as it does to all the others. Aristocracy is ""government by those who are the best citizens". The first hurdle it must pass is that those elected to govern really are "the best" a society has to offer. The best in what sense? What attributes are 'the best' when it comes to government? And finally, do those referred to as aristocrats actually possess these attributes? And all this before we consider your statement that aristocracy "offers stability and is effective in implementing laws". :chin:

Democracy is similar, also depending on the quality of those chosen to govern. It seems you don't trust the wisdom of crowds to select the best candidates. Perhaps you're right. :chin:

I think your paradox is merely a problem: how do we select the best rulers, to govern us? It's a difficult problem to solve, as you seem to focus (quite rightly) on the faults or shortcomings of the individuals who are elected. Such issues obscure the actual form of government chosen (democracy, aristocracy, dictatorship...). The problem seems to be a human problem. I.e. a problem with humans, and the way they sometimes act in a less than ideal fashion. :wink:

the crowds arent wise and the aristocrats are bound to be corrupt with soo much power.

Crowds are very wise, for some types of problem, and very stupid for others. The trick is to know which is which, I suspect. :wink:

Corrupt aristocrats? Hard to believe. <yes, that's irony>