The lesson for Americans is clear enough. Our growing size and diversity make republican government, whether democratic or oligarchic, impossible. Thomas Fleming
George Rebane
Wholesale democracy across a diverse nation is an enduring goal for collectivists, and the bane of those conservatives and libertarians who understand the functions of a republic. Long have I lamented on the increasing scope of democracy in our beloved land. Mine is a lonely stance since it is so widely opposed and misunderstood. The November 2012 edition of Chronicles, the flagship publication of the Rockford Institute, features a series of essays that explore ‘The Failure of Democracy’.
Perhaps the closest example of the dangers of broad-based democracy is found right here in California where long ago our politicians cracked the code on how to use democracy to their own ends, and in the process be innocent of any of its excesses – our notorious initiative process in which we can be manipulated to vote for taxes, constitutional changes, added regulations, new laws, and all manner of things that the Legislature in Sacramento does not want to touch.
And in the interval of the last half century or so, we the sheeple have been convinced to vote this way and that, to give us today an internationally recognized dysfunctional state. The next objective on the domestic agenda is to spread democracy across America until the last vestiges of our republic disappear under the feet of a nationwide ignorant mob.
The embrasure of Obama as the man on a white horse in 2008 confirmed what many have thought about the degeneration of our electorate. Half of the country is ready to welcome autocracy on the autocrats’ promise to drain the pockets and redistribute the wealth of the rich. They totally believe that all good things come through the benevolence of government – Ronald Reagan was wrong.
In ‘Voting for Monarchy’ editor Thomas Fleming examines some historical background and precedents that have led to our current state of national mind. I extract some relevant passages that should not surprise long time RR readers –
The political credulity of American grown-ups cannot be blamed entirely on propaganda or even on the media. We actively want to be deceived; we desperately want leaders to believe in to the point of reverence. As every American with the right to vote should know, political reverence of this sort is incompatible with republican government, but, then, hardly anyone relly wants republican government. What they want is monarchy – a Kennedy, Clinton, or Bush dynasty – and the only reason we have failed to achieve this desire is the persisting competition of the two crooked factions that divide power between them in much the same way that the North Side Mob and the Capone boys divided up Chicago.
As much discussed in these pages (see under Great Divide), multi-kulti in an expanding democracy surely leads to the dissolution of republics.
The Roman order idealized by Cicero could not effectively rule a diverse polyglot and multiethnic population of subject peoples, any more than the U.S. Constitution can serve as the political framework within which Yankees and Southerners, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Santerians, Africans, Mexicans, and Asians can function as citizens of a republic.
Smaller, more cohesive populations have given us the accoutrements of civilization that we all enjoy.
City-states and republican commonwealths have given the human race its civilization, but the painful truth is that, however we define it, republican governments are short lived, anywhere from a few generations to perhaps 500 years. … The lesson for Americans is clear enough. Our growing size and diversity make republican government, whether democratic or oligarchic, impossible.
So where does all this pull an under-educated and disinterested citizenry, here in America and worldwide. Fleming posits that –
Monarchy is the default position for human politics; republican self-government, a hard enterprise that can only be taken up by a brave and self-reliant people who possess a common culture and religion. With every cry for effective leadership, whether it comes from the leftists or conservatives, we can hear the sound of an oligarchic regime hardening into a party state. … Liberty is only for the free. It cannot be given to slaves, and if someone has to be liberated, he becomes the slave of the liberator.
In the same edition of Chronicles, Clyde Wilson (a “recovering professor”) in ‘The Imperial and Momentary We’ observes how emotion has necessarily replaced critical thinking for most of our voters. He writes
A regime of feelings cannot be a regime of law, because laws are fixed things. It must become a regime of edicts from rulers. The founders did not think that centralized tyranny and mass democracy were opposites. They recognized them as boon companions. … For mankind, a sense of shame has always been the source of good behavior and social health. People might do wrong, but they knew the were doing wrong. The founders could not imagine a self-governing community that was not a morally governed community.
In our land shame was banished long ago in favor of nourishing unmerited self-esteem.
[1nov12 update] Of the plethora of available examples of sheeple yearning for autocracy, I offer the current leaning of California for passing Moonbeam’s tax bamboozle – Prop30. It takes very little digging to discover that the main argument – ‘it’s for education’ – is patently a lie embedded ever more deeply by the daily pounding of union sponsored sound bites. The tax money is needed to maintain some tolerable level of funding teachers’ pensions; almost none of it will be used to enhance our children’s educational standards or experience.
But Moonbeam is using the well-oiled liberal threat of reducing classroom education for the kids if Prop30 fails to pass. That he can guarantee, and will do in a heartbeat to see that his teachers’ union supporters are placated – the kids can go to hell.
California is not broken because it doesn’t tax or regulate enough. The state is in the toilet with its tax and regulation policies, along with cohorts like Illinois, New York, and New Jersey. But the sheeple realize none of this. When El Lidder says we need to tax the rich more to school our kids, we simply bleat and genuflect. This is now the democracy about which Jefferson warned, ‘A nation ignorant and free, that never was and never shall be.’
George Rebane
Perhaps the closest example of the dangers of broad-based democracy is found right here in California where long ago our politicians cracked the code on how to use democracy to their own ends, and in the process be innocent of any of its excesses – our notorious initiative process in which we can be manipulated to vote for taxes, constitutional changes, added regulations, new laws, and all manner of things that the Legislature in Sacramento does not want to touch.
And in the interval of the last half century or so, we the sheeple have been convinced to vote this way and that, to give us today an internationally recognized dysfunctional state. The next objective on the domestic agenda is to spread democracy across America until the last vestiges of our republic disappear under the feet of a nationwide ignorant mob.
The embrasure of Obama as the man on a white horse in 2008 confirmed what many have thought about the degeneration of our electorate. Half of the country is ready to welcome autocracy on the autocrats’ promise to drain the pockets and redistribute the wealth of the rich. They totally believe that all good things come through the benevolence of government – Ronald Reagan was wrong.
In ‘Voting for Monarchy’ editor Thomas Fleming examines some historical background and precedents that have led to our current state of national mind. I extract some relevant passages that should not surprise long time RR readers –
The political credulity of American grown-ups cannot be blamed entirely on propaganda or even on the media. We actively want to be deceived; we desperately want leaders to believe in to the point of reverence. As every American with the right to vote should know, political reverence of this sort is incompatible with republican government, but, then, hardly anyone relly wants republican government. What they want is monarchy – a Kennedy, Clinton, or Bush dynasty – and the only reason we have failed to achieve this desire is the persisting competition of the two crooked factions that divide power between them in much the same way that the North Side Mob and the Capone boys divided up Chicago.
As much discussed in these pages (see under Great Divide), multi-kulti in an expanding democracy surely leads to the dissolution of republics.
The Roman order idealized by Cicero could not effectively rule a diverse polyglot and multiethnic population of subject peoples, any more than the U.S. Constitution can serve as the political framework within which Yankees and Southerners, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and Santerians, Africans, Mexicans, and Asians can function as citizens of a republic.
Smaller, more cohesive populations have given us the accoutrements of civilization that we all enjoy.
City-states and republican commonwealths have given the human race its civilization, but the painful truth is that, however we define it, republican governments are short lived, anywhere from a few generations to perhaps 500 years. … The lesson for Americans is clear enough. Our growing size and diversity make republican government, whether democratic or oligarchic, impossible.
So where does all this pull an under-educated and disinterested citizenry, here in America and worldwide. Fleming posits that –
Monarchy is the default position for human politics; republican self-government, a hard enterprise that can only be taken up by a brave and self-reliant people who possess a common culture and religion. With every cry for effective leadership, whether it comes from the leftists or conservatives, we can hear the sound of an oligarchic regime hardening into a party state. … Liberty is only for the free. It cannot be given to slaves, and if someone has to be liberated, he becomes the slave of the liberator.
In the same edition of Chronicles, Clyde Wilson (a “recovering professor”) in ‘The Imperial and Momentary We’ observes how emotion has necessarily replaced critical thinking for most of our voters. He writes
A regime of feelings cannot be a regime of law, because laws are fixed things. It must become a regime of edicts from rulers. The founders did not think that centralized tyranny and mass democracy were opposites. They recognized them as boon companions. … For mankind, a sense of shame has always been the source of good behavior and social health. People might do wrong, but they knew the were doing wrong. The founders could not imagine a self-governing community that was not a morally governed community.
In our land shame was banished long ago in favor of nourishing unmerited self-esteem.
[1nov12 update] Of the plethora of available examples of sheeple yearning for autocracy, I offer the current leaning of California for passing Moonbeam’s tax bamboozle – Prop30. It takes very little digging to discover that the main argument – ‘it’s for education’ – is patently a lie embedded ever more deeply by the daily pounding of union sponsored sound bites. The tax money is needed to maintain some tolerable level of funding teachers’ pensions; almost none of it will be used to enhance our children’s educational standards or experience.
But Moonbeam is using the well-oiled liberal threat of reducing classroom education for the kids if Prop30 fails to pass. That he can guarantee, and will do in a heartbeat to see that his teachers’ union supporters are placated – the kids can go to hell.
California is not broken because it doesn’t tax or regulate enough. The state is in the toilet with its tax and regulation policies, along with cohorts like Illinois, New York, and New Jersey. But the sheeple realize none of this. When El Lidder says we need to tax the rich more to school our kids, we simply bleat and genuflect. This is now the democracy about which Jefferson warned, ‘A nation ignorant and free, that never was and never shall be.’
Very well written and thought out George, well done.
I had a bit of a chuckle...surely you didn't believe that John McCain (08) was worthy of turning this thing around?
Sincere question: what do we do with the knowledge presented here?
-Go on strike (don't produce more taxable income than you need)
-Vote with your wallet
-Vote for the underdog even if solely as a protest (Ron Paul!)
-Get right with God
Posted by: TheMikeyMcD | 31 October 2012 at 03:38 PM
MikeyMcD 338pm - As you know, my thoughts on the possibility and requirements for "turning this thing around" have long decorated these pages, most recently in 'Past the Tipping Point - 27oct12'. But regarding your sincere questions, I would favor doing all save the third. I confess giving Ron Paul a lot of thought, but in the end decided on Romney.
Thank you for the kind words.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 October 2012 at 04:06 PM
" our notorious initiative process in which we can be manipulated to vote for taxes, constitutional changes, added regulations, new laws, and all manner of things that the Legislature in Sacramento does not want to touch."
Your side was sure willing to use that process (Proposition 23) to overturn AB 32 passed by the Legislator and signed by the Governor
Posted by: Paul Emery | 31 October 2012 at 08:48 PM
PaulE 848pm - You got that one right. Any port in a storm, especially one as damaging to California as AB32 which is making Sandy look like a balmy evening breeze.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 October 2012 at 09:14 PM
So if the proposition process is really ok if it is for an advocacy that you support why did you write this?
" our notorious initiative process in which we can be manipulated to vote for taxes, constitutional changes, added regulations, new laws, and all manner of things that the Legislature in Sacramento does not want to touch."
Posted by: Paul Emery | 31 October 2012 at 09:41 PM
The market is so much better for the consumer, NOT!
Exploding Pyrex is very common. Here is the story: A long, long time ago in a country we all know and love was a company named Corning. They made Pryex dishes. The material they used is called borosilicate glass. This stuff is indestructible.
But like everything else, the Bottom Liners had a great idea: sell the technology to another company. The Chinese discovered that using soda lime glass was almost as good as borosilicate glass and a lot cheaper. Today, Walmart is the largest distributor of Pryex products. Corning not only sold the technology to a company called World Kitchen, they also sold the rights to the original Pyrex logo.
Seamless. The consumer will never know.
Now it seems people are getting hurt using soda lime Pyrex. We were lucky because the dish broke while the oven was closed and the damage was limited to the oven cavity. Others have been less fortunate. Some dishes explode when they are lifted from the heating rack in the oven with devastating results. Some people are heavily scarred. World Kitchen is in denial. They say that the dishes are another brand, not theirs. Contrary to their denials the victims usually have more than one of these dishes and the Pryex logo is clearly visible.
If you buy a Pryex dish beware. The label on the front says oven safe, freezer safe, microwave safe. The instructions on the back tell another story. You cannot move a soda lime Pyrex dish from the freezer to the oven and expect it to survive. The fine print goes on and on about what you are not allowed to do with the Pyrex dish. The fine print has prevented World Kitchen from being sued because they have warned the consumer that their Pyrex dishes are junk from the get go. And they are the same price as the original Corning dishes.
What a bunch of losers we all are for buying this crap. What to do?
If you own borosilicate Pryex dishes, no fear. They have to be more than 25 years old to be sure they are indeed Corning dishes. I am not sure if the old Pryex dishes have anything stamped in them that indicates they are made by Corning. You may continue to use the soda lime dishes for holding stuff. Just do not attempt to roast or microwave with them as the hazard is very clear.
The reason the soda lime dishes let go is that over time they develop micro-cracks. Once a few micro-cracks are present and once some liquid finds its way into the cracks you have the bomb situation. The liquid is like shoving a crowbar in the dish and pulling it apart. Super heated liquids expand rapidly and it is the super heated liquids that force the soda lime glass to shatter into tens of thousands of shards.
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 31 October 2012 at 09:47 PM
What the hell is this guy smoking? "With every cry for effective leadership, whether it comes from the leftists or conservatives..." The left is the source of the destruction of the republic. It was a left wing Democrat congressman that said "We don't have to follow the Constitution, we just do whatever we want".
And Doug - Please Doug, for God's sake go get some help. They have much better treatment than electro-shock now.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 31 October 2012 at 10:11 PM
JesusB 947pm - pretty grim; does Consumer Reports know about this?
PaulE 941pm - your logic is stunning Paul. The proposition process is in place against my will; I don't like it for the reasons I stated. Were we a better read and interested electorate, perhaps our voting on propositions would not be bad. But we are not, and it is. There are many things I don't like, and about which I can do nothing except make the best of it while they are a reality.
Posted by: George Rebane | 31 October 2012 at 10:14 PM
Well Scott, I see you are drinking the capitalist without conscience (except for the bottomline) Koolaid and eating the biodegradable glass afterwards. Is that a diet for a healthy country? Gonna leave what's left of your dishes to your grandkids? Is Romney going to create 12 million jobs rebuilding what anthropogenic climate change destroys?
Disruptive non-learning students come from households where the breadwinner is not earning enough bread for food, shelter, and medical care worthy of dignity.
The greed at the top is encouraging attacks by zombies at the bottom. There's not enough to read by, under the overpass. Recently subbed in a class where co-teacher and aide agreed with me that one student needed evaluation, and their reason he wasn't getting it, "no money for that yet..."
A couple of threads back, Founding Fathers were busy making sure various low pop states would get a fair shake in the Electoral College, and preventing urban centers from dominating. How ignorant can you get? 97% of the pop WAS rural back in colonial days. Were the Founding Fathers alive today, making sure corporate mega-farms got their fair share, with only 2% of the population involved in farming, would have been considered laughable.
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 09:20 AM
Good Grief, George, where did you think I got the story from? Benghazi?
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2011/january/home-garden/glass-cookware/glass-bakeware/index.htm
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 09:24 AM
George, I am interested in your reasons for voting Romney as a CA voter (knowing that a snow ball in hell has better odds of success).
My public vote for Ron Paul has 'earned' me scorn from donkeys and elephants. Doesn't anyone care about principal anymore :).
Posted by: themikeymcd | 01 November 2012 at 09:30 AM
JesusB 920am - I think you misunderstand the historical reasons behind the "fair shake in the Electoral College". The presented utility of a new constitution was based solely on balancing the attributes of states' populations and states' sovereignty. Recall, that the constitutional process had to devise and highlight features that would attract states to join the contemplated union. It had nothing to do with how the population was divided between rural and urban areas.
re your 924am - thank you; we would have appreciated the inclusion of that citation in your 947pm essay.
Posted by: George Rebane | 01 November 2012 at 09:38 AM
Goerge, I don't have time right down to dig out the original bit about "cities dominating" as part of the argument for an Electoral College. Probably wasn't your argument.
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 09:42 AM
MikeyMcd 930am - You ask a tough, but not unexpected, question. My overarching reason for supporting Romney over Paul is the latter's foreign policy stance. For the life of me, I don't see America remaining free if it is economically weak (that's why I oppose Obama). And I don't see America being economically strong unless it is strong participant in a vibrant global economy. And I don't see such an economy persisting in a world that does not have have a principled hegemon as its sheriff. For good or ill, America is still the only candidate for that sheriff's office.
Yes, I care about both principal and principle. I voted for Romney on the basis of a principle that would conserve my principal, and therefore make possible the maintenance of the rest of my principles. Nevertheless, I dispense no scorn on your principled choice of Ron Paul.
Posted by: George Rebane | 01 November 2012 at 09:55 AM
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years."
"Great nations rise and fall. The people go from bondage to spiritual truth, to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back again to bondage."
Authors unknown
Posted by: Wayne Hullett | 01 November 2012 at 01:32 PM
WayneH 132pm - Good quotes - I remember their being attributed to some notable names. Then again, maybe not.
Democracy has been a recurring topic on RR. Here's one recent contribution.
http://rebaneruminations.typepad.com/rebanes_ruminations/2012/01/the-devil-in-democracy.html
Posted by: George Rebane | 01 November 2012 at 01:41 PM
Oh, my! "I see you are drinking the capitalist without conscience (except for the bottomline) Koolaid". There is no tie between capitalists and those that operate in unscrupulous ways. Greedy or dishonest folks come in all political stripes. There are plenty of disreputable types that are socialists and commies to boot. We have laws in this country about fraud, contract law and access to fire arms. And we have a (somewhat) free market. If I don't like the way a bank operates, I go elsewhere. Actually, I did in 1976 and the OWS crowd took decades to catch up to the availability of credit unions. But of course the OWS crowd tends to be made up mostly with the slow learners and dolts. And if I don't like exploding pyrex, I don't have to buy or use it. I just inquired at the food prep area of the household about our pyrex exploding and was given a look that told me I was chasing a wild goose. Companies that make bad products used to go out of business, but the left has put a stop to that. They are now propped up with my tax dollars, albeit with out my blessings. Remember, it was the sainted lefty Obama that engineered the bailout of GM complete with a clearing of the liabilities slate. How would you feel, Doug, if your wife was killed because of a defective GM car and you wound up with nothing from GM? Many Americans have, because of Barry the Boob, our liar in chief. So much for your big crocodile tears of pain due to "capitalists".
And I guarantee you that the disruptive kids in the class room would be that way no matter how much money the welfare state poured into their wallets. There is a relational tie between poorly performing students and family income, but no causal link. Many poor households produce fine, well-behaved kids. If they can do it, so can any family. Best lefty line I've heard all week - "medical care worthy of dignity". Yea, whatever.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 01 November 2012 at 03:59 PM
"There is a relational tie between poorly performing students and family income, but no causal link. Many poor households produce fine, well-behaved kids. If they can do it, so can any family. Best lefty line I've heard all week - "medical care worthy of dignity". Yea, whatever. "
How do you know there is no casual link? That's like saying there is a relationship between cancer and smoking, but no casual link. Just because you can't (or refuse to) see it, it doesn't mean that it isn't there.
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 10:13 PM
So it is fine with you, Scott, to have a company that owns the right to a superior product, but refuses to produce it, instead opting for a product that will self destruct sooner and thus lead to more sales by two paths: The product requires less of the consumers' dollars to buy; and then self destructs?
I wonder how many provable cases of this kind of behavior there are? Might make a good book for somebody. Hint, the supposed "enamel" surface on our new washing machine looks older now, four years later, than my mom's Kenmore's from 60 years ago, still operational in my brother's house.
Planned Obsolescence, a buzz word from the Sixties or earlier. The logic of capitalism is not always societally positive. Have another phrase on me.
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 10:21 PM
I'd love to be a solar power salesman anywhere on the East Coast for the next year or two. They were running car engines to drive the cigarette lighter outputs to charge cell phones, talk about inefficient, my dad would have been apoplectic!
Posted by: JesusBetterman | 01 November 2012 at 10:24 PM
Doug, Doug, Doug. Have you ever heard of democracy? Everyone gets to participate regardless of race creed or color. No age requirement or ID required. Works every time it's used in a free market. If you don't like the product, don't buy it. It's that simple. Here's the part you don't like. Since the libs run the school system and don't want educated voters to think about who and what they are voting for, they also produce stupid consumers. And stupid consumers tend to be happy to buy cheap Chinese junk and products that can't be repaired. They want a throw away society. You lefties want direct democracy right up until the mob starts hauling you to the guillotine. Has nothing to do with capitalism. Capitalism just produces what the mob wants. If the mob is stupid, don't blame capitalism.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 01 November 2012 at 11:14 PM
ScottO'ss 1114pm references a broader point. Capitalism is not complete ideology defining governance, but only the most efficient way known to produce and distribute goods and services that a society needs and/or wants. Leftists who claim that capitalism doesn't work criticize it in the context of governance, and fail to recognize that it is the government component of a society's business that is faulty.
Regarding currently available products being crappier than older ones (we all have a lot of stories about that). Most of products degradation is the result of the 'advances' made by militant ecologists and consumer activists. They have brought about regulations and laws that prevent the manufacture of formerly robust and long functioning product, all in the name of the ecology and consumer safety. These impact everything from paints to playground equipment to lawnmowers to ... . And you don't need rocket science to figure out which side of the political spectrum these turkeys come from.
Posted by: George Rebane | 02 November 2012 at 08:37 AM
The left always complains that capitalism has no conscience. Of course it doesn't. It's not supposed to. You, the free citizen, the volk, are supposed to provide that. Through your own decisions or through laws enforced by the govt. And since lefties don't want to have to be responsible for their own actions and decisions, it's given totally to the govt bureaucrats. And those guys know where their job protection lies. Hand in hand with trial lawyers, they have been given carte blanche to destroy free market capitalism. Conservatives are all for product liability, but confine that to products that are known to have defective design or materials for the normal intended use. If you pick up your lawn mower to trim the hedges, it's not the fault of the manufacturer, but you, the idiot. If the maker of Doug's exploding pyrex dish tested the product and found no evidence of fault, then they had reason to believe the product was safe for sale. These days, it very easy for the public to find out if there is a problem with a product. Sales will fall off and the company either goes bust or improves the product. Unless, of course, the govt steps in to prop up the company in question due to politics - witness GM. Normally, Ralph Nader and the left would be all over GM for manufacturing "dangerous" cars like the Volt, but now they are strangely silent.
And Doug, one last thing - I used the word 'causal' not 'casual'. Big difference. Pay attention, class. Poverty does not 'cause' crime. Many poor people are law abiding in the extreme. It's just that it is convenient for criminals to find an excuse for their behavior. We all know that the major problem of the poor in this nation is obesity, not starvation. There are plenty of wealthy disruptive kids. There is no 'causal' link between poverty and disruptive kids in the class rooms. I'm aware of the 'casual' link. The same sort of instability, drug use, mental illness, absent parenting, poor decision making and undisciplined behavior that cause poverty, also too often cause disruptive behavior by the children. Poverty does not 'cause' disruptive behavior.
Posted by: Account Deleted | 02 November 2012 at 09:49 AM
Breaking: 2012 Romney loss = Romney will run as democrat in 2016
LOL
Posted by: TheMikeyMcD | 02 November 2012 at 10:26 AM