Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

DEMOCRACY: The God That Failed

Democracy is an incredibly successful long con. It works because of the illusion of consent. People actually believe they are “represented.”

long con lead

And so, they accept impositions that would otherwise be intolerable, if imposed on them by a king or a fuhrer or generalissimo.

But when the “people” have decided… .

Except of course, they’ve done no such thing. It is all an illusion, a rhetorical sleight-of-hand that deftly hides the reality that it is not the “people” who decide anything but rather a small handful of individuals who wield vast – almost unlimited – power by claiming to act on their behalf.

Which is a fine-sounding literary device but as a political actuality it is an atrocity.

Have you ever consented to anything the government does to you? Been offered the free choice to accept – or decline? And not subject to violent repercussions in the event you do decide to decline? What sort of contract is it that you’re never actually been presented with but which you’re presumed to have signed – and which you are bound by whether you’ve signed – or not?

(Cont)

by Anonymousreply 52April 2, 2020 2:50 AM

very odd.

The courts have ruled that by dint of having applied for permission to travel – that is, having applied for a driver’s license – you gave given your implied consent to, well, pretty much anything the state decides to do to you. Even when in flagrant abuse of your alleged rights, as enumerated in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.

Yet few, if any of us, have actually consented to this abrogation of our rights.

We are simply told that we have, since we submitted (under duress) to the necessity of obtaining a driver’s license, so as to be able to travel semi-freely, under certain terms and conditions.

Like most political language, “consent of the governed” means (in reality) the opposite of its superficial (and generally accepted) meaning. Of a piece with legislation touting “freedom” and “patriotism.” Most of us understand very well what’s coming in that case.

We need to learn the same about “consent of the governed.”

That our consent is irrelevant.

We’ll do as we’re told – or else.

Essential to the lie of “consent” is the fraud of “representation.” As in “no taxation without representation” (implying that it’s legitimate to take your money since you’ve said it’s ok to do that… except of course you probably never said any such thing). The concept – always left fuzzy, never closely examined – is that we each give proxy power to another person (the “representative”) who then “represents” our interests.

It’s a preposterous – and pernicious – concept.

long con 2

No one has your proxy power except when explicitly given.

Have you given it?

The claim is that by voting, you’ve done exactly that. Which is nonsense, since you have no choice whatsoever to decline to give your proxy. You are presented with a choice of proxies – in the same way that a condemned man in some states is presented with the choice of lethal injection or the electric chair.

Your feeble right to vote for the candidates of other people’s choosing is the mechanism by which all your sovereign rights as an individual are vitiated.

“Representation” makes you believe it’s all ok. Makes you accept the unacceptable.

Your drop of piss vote in the bucket mingles with oceans of other people’s piss-votes. A “representative” is infused with the combined “voices” of all those people and, via some process beyond the ken of mortal man, transmutes their “will” into concrete action. Which action is infused with moral authority because it echoes the vox populi.

You are “represented.”

Nonsense.

The idea that a congressman transmutes the will of thousands of discrete individuals is actually worse than nonsense.

by Anonymousreply 1September 22, 2015 1:13 AM

imbecility.

Well, those who buy into it are imbeciles, at any rate.

Most people are unaware of the fact that the German Nazis considered themselves the ultimate democrats (little “d”). That Hitler was not a self-aggrandizing tyrant but merely a sort of conduit for the will of the German national community, the volksgemeinschaft. This is not opinion. It is what the Nazis themselves formally touted. “Hitler,” roared Rudolf Hess at one of the infamous Nuremburg partei rallies – “is Germany, just as Germany is Hitler.”

One and the same.

Noteworthy also is the verbiage of the Soviet communists, who spoke of the dictatorship of the proletariat. It wasn’t Lenin and Stalin’s dictatorship. Oh no! They were merely doing what the proletariat – the people – desired. Hence also the German Democratic Republic (the former East Germany) and the People’s Republic of China.

These are examples of democracy in its extreme, distilled form.

The “proof” of American democracy continues to wax.

One hundred years ago, we were at what you might call the hard cider, or the beer and wine stage. We are now at the Jack Daniels stage.

How much longer before we are at the methanol stage?

It depends on how much longer the long con that we are “represented” – and have given our “consent” – holds up.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 2September 22, 2015 1:15 AM

Op, What language are you speaking?

by Anonymousreply 3September 22, 2015 1:19 AM

Tacit consent, OP. The mere concept of tacit consent destroys your argument. Ignoring a long-known philosophical argument doesn't make the truth any different, it makes an author deceitful and his writing a slight of hand trick.

Try again later. Or don't.

by Anonymousreply 4September 22, 2015 1:20 AM

R4

Imbecile. It's "sleight" of hand.

How did I give "tacit consent" by virtue of birth?

Let me guess- you work for the government.

by Anonymousreply 5September 22, 2015 1:23 AM

R3 is a perfect example of the wonderful results of government education.

by Anonymousreply 6September 22, 2015 1:24 AM

OP = Idiot Libertarian Troll (ILT)

Desperate for an argument, as usual. I don't think he can get anyone to talk to him offline (and damn few online).

ILT, as we have advised you many times, the Libertarian paradise of Somalia is sitting right there waiting for you. The United States is the center of all evil, mostly through taxes, but it is not evil enough to hold you against your will. You are free to live anywhere you want. Bon voyage.

by Anonymousreply 7September 22, 2015 1:33 AM

R7 nailed it!

by Anonymousreply 8September 22, 2015 1:45 AM

How, R8?

by Anonymousreply 9September 22, 2015 1:47 AM

R7 didn't bother to read the article, or is too ignorant to read.

by Anonymousreply 10September 22, 2015 1:48 AM

With a hammer, R9.

Lord Almighty!

by Anonymousreply 11September 22, 2015 1:52 AM

R11

Really?

by Anonymousreply 12September 22, 2015 1:56 AM

R7 didn't read the article.

by Anonymousreply 13September 22, 2015 1:57 AM

You're just awful, ILT.

by Anonymousreply 14September 22, 2015 1:57 AM

R14

The truth hurts?

by Anonymousreply 15September 22, 2015 2:08 AM

No, honey, the stupid - it appalls.

When are you leaving for the Libertarian paradise of Somalia?

by Anonymousreply 16September 22, 2015 2:23 AM

People like R14 are so pathetic. They cannot stand the fact that most young people see socialist policy as stupid and dangerous, so they lash out like spoiled children.

by Anonymousreply 17September 22, 2015 4:31 AM

Deep Thoughts....by Ms. OP.

by Anonymousreply 18September 22, 2015 4:56 AM

R18

Fail.

by Anonymousreply 19September 22, 2015 5:34 AM

America isn't a Democracy. It's a Republic. Don't get the two confused

by Anonymousreply 20September 22, 2015 5:37 AM

...and yet I got rich here. ILT, you're starting to sound crazier than normal, if that's possible.

by Anonymousreply 21September 22, 2015 10:14 PM

[quote]They cannot stand the fact that most young people see libertarian policy as stupid and dangerous, so they lash out like spoiled children.

Fixed it for you, R17. By the way, moron, it's considered common courtesy online to post just a snippet and then a link rather than copying and pasting the whole article, particularly for articles as stupid as this one and every other article you cross-post. This article, in particular, is nothing but a series of logical fallacies, bearing no resemblance to reality and offering no genuine insight. There is nothing to debate about this article because the author of the article basically takes everything on faith, as do you, and posts opinion as fact. Add in Godwin's Law, with the reference to the Nazis, and you have a complete and utter failure. Only a moron like you would find that article interesting.

by Anonymousreply 22September 22, 2015 11:16 PM

R22

Aren't you the same basic bottom bitch that claims clicking on Mises.org or Reason.com or Zerohedge.com is "beneath you"?

Please answer one question- do you own your body?

by Anonymousreply 23September 23, 2015 12:36 AM

I'm not R22, but I don't believe in ownership of people. Slavery by anyone is repugnant.

by Anonymousreply 24September 23, 2015 12:42 AM

[quote]Aren't you the same basic bottom bitch that claims clicking on Mises.org or Reason.com or Zerohedge.com is "beneath you"?

Personally, I check them out on occasion just to get a good laugh. Everything you cross-post here is always, without fail, gibberish, like the article cited here. There's literally nothing there: no data, no logic, no reason, nothing but drivel trying to masquerade as some deep thought. Only you would find such an article interesting, much less compelling.

[quote]Please answer one question- do you own your body?

LOL... Moron, I do so love that you think this is a "gotcha" question.

by Anonymousreply 25September 23, 2015 12:47 AM

R25

It's only a "gotcha" question if your answer is no.

If you say "no" then you admit that the "government" owns you.

by Anonymousreply 26September 23, 2015 1:41 AM

[quote]It's only a "gotcha" question if your answer is no. If you say "no" then you admit that the "government" owns you.

LOL.... This is why nobody will ever be able to have a serious discussion with you. You are simply incapable of such a discussion.

by Anonymousreply 27September 23, 2015 1:42 AM

R27

Who owns your body?

by Anonymousreply 28September 23, 2015 1:47 AM

[quote]Who owns your body?

Yup, no spam here, moron. I repeat: "This is why nobody will ever be able to have a serious discussion with you. You are simply incapable of such a discussion."

by Anonymousreply 29September 23, 2015 1:55 AM

R29

So you admit you are too scared to admit to your communist ideology?

Chickenshit pussy.

by Anonymousreply 30September 23, 2015 2:03 AM

[quote]So you admit you are too scared to admit to your communist ideology?

Dear heart, if I had any "communist ideology," you'd actually have quotes of mine to back up the accusation. You don't, of course, which is why all you have is the usual childish insults.

[quote]Chickenshit pussy.

LOL.... Q.E.D.

by Anonymousreply 31September 23, 2015 2:08 AM

Oh God, it's Paul, the "Dear Heart" troll at r31. You sound so gay it's disgusting.

by Anonymousreply 32September 23, 2015 2:20 AM

[quote]Oh God, it's Paul, the "Dear Heart" troll at R31. You sound so gay it's disgusting.

Oh dear... I'm ever do devastated by your disapproval. How will I ever recover?

by Anonymousreply 33September 23, 2015 2:21 AM

R31

You believe the government owns us. That is communist 101.

by Anonymousreply 34September 23, 2015 2:53 AM

It's an either/or situation.

If you don't own your body, logic dictates that someone else owns you.

by Anonymousreply 35September 23, 2015 2:55 AM

[quote]You believe the government owns us. That is communist 101.

And yet, you are wholly unable to find a single quote of mine that says anything even remotely like that. Why do you feel compelled to lie so clumsily?

[quote]It's an either/or situation. If you don't own your body, logic dictates that someone else owns you.

LOL... Thank you for confirming yet again, and so vividly, why nobody can have a serious discussion with you.

by Anonymousreply 36September 23, 2015 3:06 AM

R31 is a coward.

by Anonymousreply 37September 28, 2015 4:48 AM

The National Surveillance State of America in the New American Century is the Fourth Reich.

Germany lost WWII but the Nazis didn't. They are now doing business under the name Neocons.

by Anonymousreply 38September 28, 2015 4:52 AM

[quote]R31 is a coward.

LOL.... Is that really the best you can do? Resurrecting a pathetically stupid thread to give a pathetically stupid attempt to insult me? I'm flattered, of course, but, really, you do need to get a life.

by Anonymousreply 39September 28, 2015 2:38 PM

Nobody owns my body. I don't believe in slavery.

Any arguement that begins with "who owns your body" or "Logic dictates..." Is probably for morons.

Really, ILT, you know there is something wrong with you. Try to resist the urge to demonstrate it.

by Anonymousreply 40September 28, 2015 2:59 PM

What does the author in OP's quoted article wish to offer as a replacement for representative democracy? Please explain how the replacement will prevent autocracy?

by Anonymousreply 41September 28, 2015 3:15 PM

R41

Read the link.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 42October 1, 2015 4:11 AM

Thanks, R41. So, after quite a bit of verbiage, it turns out he proposes a return to "looking favorably" on monarchies, but in truth he wants to do away with states altogether. So he's really just another Anarcho-Capitalist in verbose drag. I've got a lot of sympathies with minarchism, but these political theorist windbags just tire me out.

by Anonymousreply 43October 1, 2015 4:30 AM

They all remind me of a political Captain Queeg who prove the most byzantine theories with "geometric logic."

by Anonymousreply 44October 1, 2015 1:17 PM

R20 is right, listen to R20

by Anonymousreply 45October 1, 2015 1:44 PM

[quote]They all remind me of a political Captain Queeg who prove the most byzantine theories with "geometric logic."

And a complete disconnection from reality. I love how libertarianism somehow manages to overcome human nature because ... reasons!

by Anonymousreply 46October 1, 2015 8:33 PM

If 6'3" Bonnie Prince William will lord it over me, I'm all in favor of monarchy.

by Anonymousreply 47October 1, 2015 9:47 PM

R45

Naively believing something so utterly untrue is the basis for severe cognitive dissonance. The USA is an oligarchy and has been for over 100 years. As a government under total control of big business and the federal reserve it has ceased to be a republic. Well, unless you consider a failing banana republic a true republic.

by Anonymousreply 48October 1, 2015 11:15 PM

[quote]If 6'3" Bonnie Prince William will lord it over me, I'm all in favor of monarchy.

Hot!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 49April 2, 2020 1:52 AM

Fuck off, Ayn Randroid.

by Anonymousreply 50April 2, 2020 1:54 AM

Yawn. Fart. Scratch. Rinse. Repeat.

There is no perfect form of government, OP. Find your own island.

by Anonymousreply 51April 2, 2020 2:16 AM

Whatever, Vlad

by Anonymousreply 52April 2, 2020 2:50 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!