The current state of democracy is what we have made it...on the order of Dewey's remarks about belief (see: his book on How We Think, the section on Beliefs and Existences). I have referred to him before, so further comment is unnecessary. Right now, there is no viable political solution, as far as I can see. Hasn't been one since about 1962, and after the 1968 showdown in Chicago, it was 'turtles, all the way down...' I am glad most of this is past-tense for me... reading Kenneth Burke right now---his Attitudes on History. Amazing insight for a man born in 1897. And lacking formal education credentials. Well, we just never know...

Ken Kesey's 'One Flew over the Coockoo's Nest' tells the story of a place filled with crazy people and a governess named Nurse Cratchet who's job it was to make order out of the order-less. In the end her government only made things worse and as for her good intentions, like perhaps all governments, perhaps, she was found to be the craisest and in most need of management of all.

Our Democracy needs management!

I think the best One can do is to learn to control One's own self. Once we elect others to rule or govern over us, we lose our own strength of self-control. An example: the climate is changing in a negative way caused by ourselves mankind. Because we have given away our self-control to others we now ask what our government is going to do to fix this, rather than ask what I will do to fix our dying planet. That is just one example.

"If you want to awaken all humanity, then awaken all of yourself. If you want to eliminate the suffering in the world, then eliminate all that is dark and negative in yourself. Truly, the greatest gift you have to give is that of your own self transformation." LAO TZU

The cure for governments of all kinds around the world, including our own Democracy is self-control. Nothing more, nothing less. =

Still reading the Burke book...perhaps de-mocratizing is a better description of what we have now, as your first paragraph suggests. Turtles all the way downward. In any case, Burke's book dissects history better than many more modern efforts I have read--- public intellectuals have done much to analyze things past, and somehow, project things future---prognostication is always risky, at best.Your question about collapse of top-down authority seems rhetorical to me because anarchy ensues when authority collapses: people just don't know how to behave. Going back a step, authority without hierarchy was a primal sort of contrivance---the hierarchy thing came with POPULATION,which is likely why some of the Enlightenment guys said democracy was better suited for small countries with small populations---if it gets too big,it is time to fall back and punt---or, 'go Walden' which is functionally impossible. For us to bemoan democratization of information is moot. Someone should have thought of that thirty years ago---and even if they had done so, what would that have attained? Freedom of speech is unassailable. So far.

As a practical matter, anarchy and chaos are concomitant with freedom. Be careful what you wish for...

I have not tried to answer all your questions---just those I feel most confident in addressing. I recommend Burke's book, Attitudes Toward History. You may already know of it. Didactic equates with propaganda and rhetoric, according to Burke. And, then some...
Harry.

I have not yet listened to this show. Let me offer a testament to its power and your erudition above by offering a take pre and post my listen.

Here are my PREcepts in regards to authority and resistance.

I walked into a bookstore last week and came across a blind date display. If you don't know what this is...let me tell you.

A book blind date is a wrapped book with a price and the first sentence of the book written on the outside of the wrapping.

If you have never seen one of these let me tell you a little bit about myself ... I read and appraised every one of them sniffing the package for traces of lignin and acid decay.

Writing the first sentence is a dark and stormy attempt to characterize ones authority to the reader. As a rule that authority can be contrafactual, apposite or gratuitous. The authority of these sentences lies in their truth. The very best books I have ever read portend in one truth in establishing their authority only to take harbor in another later. Truth is the bare standard by which I judge art and authority. My counter-narrative to false authors is my own definition of resistance and its baby is my attention span.

There you go. That is my take going in. Authority is a story. Resistance is when you don't believe the story. I'm not sure about the necessity of hierarchy or chaos (though I put it out there - chaos is not the opposite of authority... that would be a falsehood - (look...I double entendred?)) This is similar to Good and apathy where evil finds it's apposite in doing nothing.

Life is all the stuff in between authority and resistance... now let me find the time to listen up and hopefully learn something.

Edit for typo - 5/10

I have coined a little, playful soliloquy on the notion of authority. It fits into the military structure in its chosen language, but can also be transmogrified into other top-down organizational formats:

Private Interest and Corporal Punishment report up the chain-of-command in a line of accountability leading to General Confusion. Before that eventuality, however, Major Disaster has always already left his indelible mark and our friend, the General is left with no other option. All were, ostensibly, doing their job, but the Private and the Corporal were irrelevant from the beginning...

Cordially,
Neuman

It seems fair to say that where there is authority, there is resistence.. It is almost a yin/yang thing of co-equal opposition. Deep politics aside, if we examine the structures of everyday life, we see clearly the push and pull that goes on. Those of us who work(ed) for some higher authority know(ew) the drill and act(ed), more or less, accordingly. If we behave[ed] correctly, in line with institutional rules and structure, there was opportunity for better pay and, of course, more responsibility. The difficulty presented many of us was correctly aligning responsibility with any additional authority gained. This pitfall, or better, avoiding it, depends on an accurate reading of shallow politics. Some of us fail(ed) the assessment, and therefore, the chance for advancement. In government bureaucracies, deep and shallow politics are inextricably linked. The rope is tightly strung. For some, a rise to the level of their own incompetence demands success in melding together deep and shallow politics. Skill in that endeavor does not require much in the way of superior cognitive skills. It is more like a street fight, requiring toughness; resiliency; and ruthlessness. We don't all manage the combination.