The manner in which of capitalism has sometimes been described may apply to democracy as well. Yes, capitalism is a ruthless, cruel economic system. But it’s the best we’ve got.
Democracy is overrated. And failed. A Republic, if you can keep it, is not.
PS We are supposed to be a Rebuplic.
Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for lunch.
That quote sure seems intimate...
The problem is we are not as educated and civilized as the trappings suggest.
When you have “People Power”, you need to take a good look at the people.
“people”.
We are far from a democracy - and that’s good.
Everything in the constitution including the bill of rights is outside the purview of majority rule.
“For some time, the leading Western nations have acted upon the assumption that democracy is the solution to political conflict...”
Democracy is mob rule. Constitutional Republicanism, based on the inalienability of “God-given rights” is the solution to political conflict.
The reason there is political conflict in America today is that at least half the country wants to destroy the Constitution, and half no problem letting evil half-wits, like 0bama, do it through all the freebies he offers!
Dear old Dad always said a benevolent dictatorship would be preferable to letting the homos, atheists, abortion enthusiasts, union pinky rings, condom-throwers, Boy Scout haters, hand-wringing college professors, Georgetown sluts, Hollywood drunks, America-hating malcontents, minority “victim” classes, and the rest of the moochers, deadbeats, parasites, and goofballs who make up the Democrat party’s base elect America’s “leaders”.
I agree.
I’ll put it this way the only true democracy, in all of of reality is found in Hell. Heaven is a kingdom.
Democracy is rotten mob rule... it should be shunned like communism... now a Representative Republic that has not been turned into a mob rules government is the way to go... read the Founding Fathers... they explain it all.
First, we have to have a proper description of “DEMOCRACY”. The best one I’ve ever heard is by Benjamin Franklin. In explaining what “DEMOCRACY” was “TWO WOLVES AND A LAMB, TRYING TO DECIDE WHAT TO HAVE FOR DINNER”. In other words, MAJORITY RULES. If the MAJORITY decides that any minority was a danger to the majority, they can be done away with. Look what’s happening in all these countries that chose “DEMOCRACY”? Egypt? Syria? Iran? Iraq? etc.etc,etc. All those countries, their leaders were democratically elected. Hey lets just 90 years back. Hitler was “DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED”. The best form of government ever created is the CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC that was designed by our forefathers. As flawed as it is, It’s still the best. Because it’s self correcting. Because this type of GOVERNING puts the individual ahead of the collective. Unfortunately, our politicians prefer the “COLLECTIVE” type of “RULING instead of “GOVERNING”. That’s the nature of all governments. Because it’s a lot harder to “GOVERN” a group of individuals and much easier to “RULE” a collective
...democracy is only made possible by other and more deeply hidden institutions.
Well, then, how do we measure up?
First among them is judicial independence.
A court system may be corrupt and still independent, which is, I think, an optimistic view of present-day America. There will always be attempts to re-form the Supreme Court to reflect the Executive will; that is built into the system. And the phenomena of judge-shopping and jury-rigging tug at the very roots of the system. This pillar of Democracy still stands, I think, albeit battered and never out of danger.
Then there is the institution of property rights.
It is astonishing how far this country has proceeded on the road to hell in this regard: doctrines of eminent domain, confiscatory property taxation, confiscation of cash and property with no due process under anti-drug policies, and arbitrary and unconstitutional land seizures under the rubric of environmental policy, are currently the law of the land. No points at all here.
Then there is freedom of speech and opinion.
"Hate" speech laws, anyone? We have an entire public relations industry operating with the complete cooperation of the media whose sole purpose is to purge the citizens' mouths, and by extension, their minds, of terms that may hinder their molding into obedient little government drones. How far we have proceeded down this particular road to hell is witnessed this week in the apparently serious calls for federal prosecution of a fellow wearing a rubber mask in the likeness of the President. That is likely to be hooted out of the public eye, but the fact that it is possible at all speaks very poorly for freedom of expression.
This, however ludicrous, would be inconceivable were it not for present and very active policies of the federal government in (1) collecting every possible electronic intelligence datum on everyone, (2) using the machinery of federal taxation to suppress dissent through the IRS, the SEC, the EPA, and (3) deliberate campaigns within the popular media to suppress, distort, misdirect, and abuse criticism of the current administration's policies both foreign and domestic. No points at all here, either.
Finally, there is legitimate opposition.
This, unfortunately, is moribund between the two principal parties of the United States federal government at this time. It is not dead - the defeat of most of the wilder gun control demands of late is an encouraging sign - but resistance to the more radical progressive demands does not, I think, come even close to representing their rejection on the part of the public whose opinions are supposedly represented. The danger is not so much in such abominations as 0bamacare, which was passed strictly on party lines, but on the acceptance or lack of resistance to subtler threats such as dictatorial edicts from virtually every department and agency in the Executive: the EPA, the IRS, the SEC, the Homeland Security organs, the Departments of Education, Labor, Commerce, and the department named with Orwellian irony, "Justice". These are operating in lockstep with but a single purpose in mind: everything, absolutely everything must be regulated. Opposition to this steady descent into a police state appears nowhere within the government whose nominal purpose is to protect against it. Opposition to it is dispersed, marginalized, cursed, ridiculed, systematically repressed.
But it exists, and it is not weak. Should the government continue to proceed along these lines with as little self-control as we have seen of late we may well be at the "alter or abolish" point, and I am speaking as soberly as I know how.
I am sure I have only touched on these points and others here with greater learning will expand, correct, and admonish as they see fit. This, at least, is still possible. For now.