Global Mobocracy

The Digital Freedom Network ^ | September 5, 2003 | A. E. Huggett

[quidnunc]

Claiming that the results will affect everyone on Earth, three Dutch progressive political activists decided to display their ignorance of America's representative republican form of government by starting a web site called TheWorldVotes. This site ostensibly allows "global citizens" to cast their ballots in electing the next US President in 2004. Even though voting through this web site has no official standing, authors Wiebe de Jager, Bart Lacroix, and Bouwe Westerdijk hope to influence the outcome of the US election by showing US voters who their European counterparts would find more palatable.

Since the three Dutch men used Carl Sagan's amorphous "Our loyalties are to the species and the planet. We speak for Earth" quote as an opening salvo, the casual observer could be forgiven for wondering if voting privileges are to be extended to chimpanzees and Tasmanian devils too. While TheWorldVotes' main goal is to embarrass President Bush, whom most socialist-corrupted Europeans find incomprehensible because of his personal honesty and forthrightness, the site's secondary goal is to establish "global democracy"…"committed to building a democratic international system of governance that is based on respect for universal human rights."

Socialists love straight democracy because it always devolves into easily manipulated mobocracies complete with strong-arm dictators as in China, Cuba or North Korea, all nations with appalling human rights abuses. This is one reason why Democrats in the US constantly tell the voters that they live in a democracy even though the US has an Electoral College that is solely responsible for electing the President. It is also the same reason why the Democrats still to this day complain that Al Gore won the popular vote and therefore should be President. America's Founding Fathers understood that voters would be inclined solely to vote for "Favorite Sons" and that demagogues could sway mobs. The popular vote decides the party affiliation of the electors of their particular states but electors are not bound to vote straight party lines. Considering the massive Democratic voter fraud in the urban areas, the Electoral College safeguarded the honesty of the last American election by voting for the best man, not the most popular man.

-snip-

[quidnunc]

Quote:

Aware that ballot stuffing and poll busting is a favorite pastime on the Web, the site's administrators promise to establish a "global Electoral Commission" to validate what is essentially a worthless mockery of the voting act.

I have a question: What purpose do they believe this exercise in futility will serve?

[dhuffman@awod.com]

Democracy is the rule of fools by fools. I see mobocracy as no different. It is just a sillier vulgar name for the same thing.

[razorback-bert]

The USSC looks to the world for its' law, why not voters?

[Sender]

Just what the article says; to show the world who the EU finds most palatable to run the US. Will anyone be surprised if Bush comes in last with the 'international community'?

[monkeywrench]

Maybe gray davis can sell them all a drivers license, just to give their vote a little legitimacy. :)

[.cnI redruM]

Reminds me of the CA driver's license law....

[chesley]

freep this poll!! I'm registered 4 times and will vote for Geroge Bush. That's assuming, of course, that he gets a ballot position on it.

[MalcolmS]

From the Article...
"...the Electoral College safeguarded the honesty of the last American election by voting for the best man, not the most popular man."

This is complete and utter nonsense. When was the last time an electoral college member voted independently? With elected senators (previously appointed by state governors), the USA is virtually indistinguishable from a (representative) democracy.

The electoral college system, as now operated, simply means that it is winner-take-all for each state.

Who are the electoral college members for your state? In a real electoral college system, you would know who they are, choose them based on their wisdom and integrity, and they would then gather and select the best person for the job. That is not what happens.

[quidnunc]

MalcolmS wrote: (From the Article..."...the Electoral College safeguarded the honesty of the last American election by voting for the best man, not the most popular man." This is complete and utter nonsense. When was the last time an electoral college member voted independently? With elected senators (previously appointed by state governors), the USA is virtually indistinguishable from a (representative) democracy. The electoral college system, as now operated, simply means that it is winner-take-all for each state. Who are the electoral college members for your state? In a real electoral college system, you would know who they are, choose them based on their wisdom and integrity, and they would then gather and select the best person for the job. That is not what happens.

You totally misread the author's intent, which is to point out that although Al Gore had the most votes, thanks to the electoral college George Bush — who the author is opining is the best man — saw elected.

But if we had mobocracy Gore would have won.