Main menu

The Absurdity of Democracy

(originally launched into cyberspace on 11/04/2008)

It's not often that we're treated to this spectacular an example of
how absurd it is to put any faith in elections, democracy, and
"majority rule."

First, it must be pointed out that even if there were a perfect way
for democracy to be administered, it would still be utterly immoral
and completely illegitimate. As Benjamin Franklin put it, democracy
is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. To put
it even more bluntly, there's another good example of true
democracy in action: gang rape.

Despite the fact that Americans are constantly indoctrinated into
the notion that democracy is great, and that it is the same as
freedom, it's all pure bunk. A majority can commit heinous evil
just as easily, if not more easily, than a minority, and they have
done so over and over again throughout history. When most people
support an idea that is stupid and/or evil--which happens quite
often--that idea doesn't magically become intelligent or good.
Likewise, when an idea is inherently righteous, it is not any less
so because only a minority supports it--which also happens more
often than not. The majority cannot, by voting, make something evil
into something good, any more that they could make two plus two
equal five by "voting" for that. In fact, democracy is worse than
worthless, because it legitimizes and "legalizes" evil, simply
because a majority advocates it.

All that having been said, how "democracy" works in the real world
is even worse than true democracy, and today millions of Americans
will go out and proudly prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt.

This election, the NRA is endorsing a candidate who has a lousy
record on defending Second Amendment rights. This election,
countless conservatives who protest the left-leaning media are
endorsing a candidate who went to great lengths to shred the First
Amendment, so much so that the act butchering freedom of speech
bears his name ("McCain/Feingold"). This election, fiscal
conservatives by the millions will be voting for someone who has
repeatedly supported higher taxes and higher government spending.
This election, religious conservatives will be voting for a man who
admitted to committing adultery, and dumped his first wife for a
younger, prettier, richer wife, after his first wife was disfigured
and crippled in an auto accident. This election, millions of devout
Republicans will vote for a man who has made a career out of voting
against his own party.

Why would all that be happening? Because, as all the McCain
supporters will tell you, the "other guy" is even worse. And
therein lies the insanity of the American version of "democracy":
half the country will be voting for someone whom almost none of
them actually like. Only by comparison does he seem even remotely
tolerable. (Ten years ago, imagine how Republicans would have
responded to the possibility of a McCain presidency.) And that is
the heart of one of the best tyrant tricks in history: giving
people a feeling of empowerment by giving them a "choice," while
making sure their range of choices is utterly useless.

To put it another way, who chose the choices? Even Obama, who seems
to now have a lot of people genuinely excited (because they are too
busy feeling good to actually think about what it is they are
supporting), was very recently an unknown to most of the country.
Was it the American people who put him on the ballot? Of course
not. They didn't even know he existed. And was it the people who
demanded that McCain run for the presidency? Hardly. So how did
those two end up being the choices put before the American people?

The game is rigged. No, I don't mean by voting machines that allow
tampering, or by people voting more than once, though both of those
happen. No, the rigging that matters most happens long before
anyone casts a vote. The two parties--or rather, the two clubs
inside the one ruling class--choose who will run for office. The
people then get to choose between Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee--a
"choice" which is designed to give the people no power at all.

Some may label this a "conspiracy theory," but at this point one
would have to be both blind and stupid not to see it. The
establishment has given the American public two nationalist,
collectivist, Constitution-hating redistributionists to "choose"
from. You can vote for Obama, and have less money and less freedom,
or you can vote for McCain, and have less money and less freedom.
And making that choice, you are told, is your "voice." You're
supposed to feel empowered by being able to pick which of two
corrupt, lying crooks will control your life and empty your wallet
for the next four years.

And how do the voters respond to that? By sending the clear
message, over and over again, that whatever sleazy, dishonest,
principle-free opportunist megalomaniacs the two parties offer up,
the people will keep right on supporting those two parties. After
all, they claim, voting for someone who is NOT one of the two major
crooks would be a "wasted vote." And so they choose the lesser of
two evils, and admit doing so.

And that about sums it up. Today millions of Americans will
intentionally and knowingly support what they openly admit is evil.
Whichever candidate you think is worse, consider this from the
tyrants' viewpoint. They are comfortable in the fact that they can
keep right on cranking out crooks like McCain and Obama, and most
of you will keep right on supporting them. When the tyrants have
subjects who are this easy to manipulate, don't expect freedom to
come back to this country any time soon.

Larken Rose

P.S. For further repudiation of the "democracy" myth, check out the
following link for an article by Peter McCandless: