Does the concentration of power in the hands of a few ever benefit the majority?

No, it always allows for one person to do whats best for them which is usually not best for everyone else.

Often, a majority is benefited by the people in power, but the majority is oppressed much harder.

No, because when you have power, you always want more of it.

No, sovereignty belongs to the people. Any authority should be accountable to the people.

No power breeds the greed for more power. If we spread the power to as many hands as possible and decentralize it, it will be less likely to be abused.

There is a majority in every group but authoritarianism may still favor the majority because of how strict it is.

Never. Power should always be in the hands of the people, not a select few.

No because it leads to corruption and a certain group would speak for the whole, not allowing the entire population to prosper or their needs be considered

Not in the long run it doesn't; we are no longer a civilization that needs to be told what to do to be able to survive; it with almost always lead to corruption and human rights being violated.

The power should be in the hands of the many, ie the voters. Unfortunately, it is now in the hands of the elected, who don't seem to represent anyone but themselves.

It theoretically could, but in practice it never happens.

Yes it does the opinion a few people make can make the rest of us see different.

No I do not think that Authoritarianism does not put power in the hands of the majority, because it is the practice of making decisions for others. Everyone has different opinions so one person making a choice for everyone would lead to less power and control.

No. Power corrupts. Every government in history has proven this. Even if you get one benevolent dictator, what safeguard is there against a malevolent dictator taking the throne in the future?

It is difficult to make decisions with everybody involved, so it is helpful to have delegates to speak. We are too large of a country to have a pure democracy. However, we need to find the appropriate balance where the most voices are heard while progress is still happening.

Depends on their influence, and what they are contributing.

I feel like too much freedom would cause many conflicts and issues for louder groups would get more say.

Yes. A strong central power is more efficient and powerful in a literal sense. Ideally this power is used for good, and the people profit. The average person is retarded and cant think for **** .

No because either way it increases a danger of possible authoritarian change within the system.