Many of the most powerfull people in the world today have gained their power solely through their election by the general public. This ability of the people to chose their own political leaders is rarely questioned, indeed, forms of government that do not advocate such principles are looked down upon as being backward and undemocratic. The ability of the people to chose their own political leaders is a cornerstone of democracy, the 'government of choice' of the modern world. But is allowing the general public to select the most powerful person in the world such a wise decision?
Take the position of the President of the United States - an office commonly acknowledged to be one of, if not the most powerful position in the world. Does the average person (American, in this case) have the ability to truly differentiate between the two final candidates, whom practically none of them have ever met? Their desicion is made over issues that the vast majority of the voters have little knowledge about, and only know what two very biased sources have told them? People chose the colours of their bedroom walls with more care than they do their president.
This fundamental part of democracy is critically flawed, and will bring democracy down with it when it shatters.
(The American system is flawed in many other ways, but this is just a more generic example)