Some Optimism, Part 2
The scam of democracy is actually a good thing... Hear me out
You won’t find a harsher critic of democracy: this ridiculous scam, the emperor’s clothes, this audacious lie that “democracy” or “republic” or “socialism” (or whatever rebrand) is supposedly “the rule of the people”. It demonstrably isn’t.
Criticism of democracy
If you held referenda right now on every single thing each state does, you’d find that the vast majority of people do not consent to those activities or policies. Sure, we all “agree” on the basic, common-sense stuff we “get” from the state, the bare minimum slave owners provide to ensure good stock. The state is just an artificial monopoly of public goods, which does a miserable job at delivering because it is a dicincentivised monopoly. But the vast majority of Americans, for example, would vote “no” to a war with Iran. So, how exactly is democracy or republic working as promised?
Choosing between two identical dictators — who have already been chosen for you — isn’t ruling yourself. Having interest groups choose rulers via lobbying and Epstein-style extortion instead of a useless ballot isn’t power to the people. Even if we were allowed to choose our leaders, that still wouldn’t have been “people-rule” (literal translation of democracy).
True “people-rule” is voting on every single policy, not selecting generic candidates who are not even legally liable for their campaign promises, and never keep those promises. Or worse, they “keep” their promises in name only, but not in practice. So they betray their supporters while maintaining plausible deniability: for example, Brexit. Yes, Brexit never happened, not in any material way: mass immigration (the main issue) has even increased post-Brexit. So, democracy, even on a referendum level, does not work as intended or promised. Another example is puppets like Obama or Trump, waging mass-scale war while parading as “peace-time presidents”. And their willingly naive fans gobble it up; keeping promises as narrative, but not fact.
Even if we did choose policies (not people) via voting, some things are not up for a vote. Ancient people used to gang up together to steal, rape, and murder, just because they presumed that numbers somehow meant something. And mobs were considered legal and acceptable. The officialisation of gang mentality is democracy. Democracy is a euphemism for mob rule. Whatever happened to the rights of the minority? There is no greater oppression of the minority than democracy — the literal definition of democracy is the dictatorship of the majority. Some things are just not up for a vote: the majority should have had no authority to execute Socrates. Democracy proved corrupt even in its initial applications (ostracism).
Lastly, democracy is simplistic and retarded. What does “majority” mean anyway? The majority is easy to define when there are only two options to choose from. Reducing everything to only two options creates false dichotomies, which distorts the actual will of the people. But some decline to vote, or are unable to, or are disallowed to, given arbitrary criteria. What about them?
And what about more than two options? When collectively choosing between more than two options, then it’s not the majority that gets to impose its will; it’s the largest minority dictating its will on the majority. Ridiculous. Make it make sense.
Democracy is a lie
Democracy is, in many ways, worse than an overt dictatorship, because slaves who imagine they’re free are the most obedient and sustainable slaves. At least in the past, slaves knew what they were, and they resented their masters — rightfully so.
Democracy is dictatorship with extra steps.
However, in the past, slavery was sustainable because it was “acceptable”, even by slaves. Now, slavery is not acceptable, so the ruling class retreats, makes concessions, and is forced to perform the act of the emperor’s clothes of “democracy”. Today, we are slaves with a loosened collar and the fairytale of freedom.
Motivation behind democracy
Democracy is a concession by the ruling class.
The fact that the self-appointed “leaders” of this human-infested planet feel the desperate need to appease and pacify us with the false notion of democracy — the lie of “self-rule” — shows that, as a species, we no longer accept slavery and oppression. For us to accept slavery and oppression, we first need to be deceived. Otherwise, the rulers’ house of cards collapses.
And yes, many of us consciously allow ourselves to be deceived in that we know democracy is a scam — we know we’re still plebs — but we pretend we’re free because we happened to find ourselves in positions of alpha-slave status. Oppression serves the Uncle Toms of this world because they value one-upping their peers more than they value their own freedom.
But the fact that the state feels so insecure and compelled to spend vast resources and effort propagandising us about the supposed “freedoms of democracy” goes to show that logic and goodness are winning. It means the state knows it will collapse the second that a critical mass of people sees through the unnecessary nature of its evil.
It means sustainable models of decentralised self-governance are closer than ever because more and more people are actually getting the concept of self-governance. And belief in a system is all the system needs to be sustainable — see all those different forms of government, all those religions, “authority” structures, and fake/fiat currencies.
Positive view
Remember: Lying is an admission of weakness and fear. Nobody lies unless they fear something. And the state lies constantly, thus confessing its vulnerability and its hopeless need for our uninformed consent.
What does the state fear?
It fears our ideals of freedom, consent, sanity, truth, and self-sovereignty. Because these ideals can topple the state’s house of cards, and finally show that the emperor wears no clothes. These values were not held a century ago to the degree they are held today.
Maybe voluntary, decentralised, consent-based, incentive-driven systems of self-governance are finally within reach, to be applied sustainably by populations who finally understand there is no need for the lazy, knee-jerk reaction of centralised, threat-driven “authority” — far from it.
Maybe my optimism here is delusional. Maybe I’m just expressing feelings more than rational thought. Make what you will with this. Time will tell.