I'd like to slaughter some sacred cows in this post. Democracy is widely regarded as the be all end all solution to all problems – be it governance, justice, business, or even science, somehow the consensus of many is automatically considered infallible, optimal, omniscient and in worst cases omnipotent. We are told that democracy may have weaknesses but that there is nothing better. So we are told to challenge even inalienable principles by putting them on vote by the electorate or sale in the market. This is the century of democracy. But when the history of this century is written, democracy will be considered an impossible ideal, much like communism. People will realize that consent can be manufactured, marketed and bought. In places like USA and India, it is clear that the mob is royally manipulated by few. Even websites like Reddit, and Digg, which claim to be democratic, is run based on biases accumulated by its users. Socrates was murdered by vote. The citizens agreed he mislead the youth. Father of chemistry, Lavoisier was guillotined with the consent of his society. All of the lynchings, sati, holocaust and witch hunts, were done with consensus of the majority. It may be true that the consensus was engineered by a few with an agenda. But that does not matter. It is clear that democracy is bad for policy. The only thing democracy is good for is selecting personnel. Most of a country's policy must be determined by inalienable principles arrived at by rational argument. This is what a Republic is. It is a system in which there are principles which are neither up for sale nor for vote.