Democracy: Most Successful Delusion Sold in the World

Democracy: Most Successful Delusion Sold in the World

First and foremost, it is important to understand that what democracy is or means. Contrary to the popular and academic beliefs, democracy doesn’t have variations.

Having variations and different definitions for the democracy is like having different definitions for the word sun and its function in our solar system.

As the sun function and movements are constant in our solar system, the definition of the word democracy is constant and doesn’t change based on the viewpoints or interpretations of the intellectuals, academics and political theorists.

Also, it is important to understand that democracy is neither a religion or ideology but merely a political system like any other political system.

Therefore, some pseudo-intellectuals trying so desperately labeling their own ideas and political theories as one of the variations of democracy, doesn’t change the truth and the meaning of the word democracy.

The sun rises in the east and sets in the west as a constant. Such truths never change and no matter how much human beings try to change their definitions, such a movement of sun and its function remains constant. The same principle applies to the Operational Definition of the word democracy.

Etymology – definition of democracy:

Democracy literally means “governance by the common people”. This is a very dangerous political system because it is the same as “rule of the mob”.

The last true democracy that the world experienced was Germany of 1930s. This happened when a highly gifted charismatic Austrian public speaker, Adolf Hitler, with his team of genius and highly capable communicators and media strategists and tacticians, captured the public imagination.

Hitler and his team members using the mechanism of the rule of the mob, populist government, took over Germany and almost succeeded in destroying the entire planet earth during the Second World War. Hitler Marketed his political party as Socialist Nationalist party of Germany, that its short form is Nazi Party.

Since the highly educated academics are aware of such realities, and are terrified by such possible consequences of rule of the mob, then they have develop this delusion of grandeur, that in order to defuse the rule of the mob, the solution is either socialism or communism as a political system. Such notions and arguments are beautiful and idealistic also invalid.

First and foremost, such intellectuals arguments are invalid because the implementation of socialism or communism is only possible if we have perfect human beings, who would not make any mistake and do not give in to their temptations, as fallible human beings.

Such crowds of highly educated academics believe, that the rule of the mob could rise to power, when there is poverty and desperation in society. This is argument is also invalid. This is because when people are desperate, the last thing that they think about is revolution but rather they constantly think about finding food to eat.

You cannot rally the poor and hungry who are in need of food behind the ideology of equal distribution of wealth. This is because they urgently need food and shelter as is, here and now. Such poor and hungry majority cannot even process such ideology as the highly educated left academic present, never mind rallying behind them as leaders.

Revolution happens by the middle class populations in society, who get panicked and paranoid by the idea of losing their middle class status and lifestyle. Poor and hungry people, who are desperate, are already poor, hungry and have nothing to lose, which conditions them to have no motivation to become revolutionaries to protect their class, status or lifestyle to begin with.

Furthermore, what such highly educated academics from that of left political spectrum fail to understand is: when you attempt to constantly control, regulate and micromanage majority of affairs of the people in society, through social engineering and centralized big governments, then soon that lead to failure and lack of public support due to social trust.

No form of government be it democracy, socialism, communism, capitalism or dictatorship, could possibly function without having a reasonable portion of its country’s population’s support. The attempt to constantly micromanage and control everything in society would eventually lead to such lack of public support due to lack o social trust.

This is because controlling the majority of the affairs of the people in society, by shaping the behaviour of populations through the mechanics of policy as the governing tool, is the actual definition of oppression and dictatorship. After certain level of pushing the envolop the people would start to quetions:

1) who the hell is the government to tell us how we can raise our kids or how many children we are allowed to have?

2) who the hell is government to tell us which spiritual path we should or should not follow?

When we try to touch such most primal instincts of human beings, that are ingrained in human DNA for hundreds of thousands of years throughout our evolution as species, then that is the moment that such form of micromanagement freak governments would dig their own grave. This is the reason that socialism and communism, and those who resort to social engineering, tend to constantly and consistently fail.

Such left-leaning idealistic oppressive circumstances, due to micromanagement and regulations by the government, are no different from creating an environment that gives rise to the panic and paranoia of educated middle class, leading them to their revolt. This has happened in the former Soviet countries, and most of the other states with micromanaging socialist and communist governments.

Therefore, socialism and communism, similar to that of theocracy, are the other side of the extreme of democracy which the is rule the mob. All such political systems, systems of governance, are imbalanced and unnatural political systems.

Democracy doesn’t exist throughout the Western world. One ought to understand the differences between having elections, rights, freedoms, civil liberties and privacy, and what democracy is as a political system is.

We have elections to choose our Executive Directors and the members of our legislative assemblies on local, provincial/state and federal level, whose duty are govern the day-to-day affairs of the city, province/state and country.

However, none of such elected officials by any means have the power to change the foundation and core concepts, that are decided by the members of Board of Directors of each country. The elected politicians are Executive Directors withExecutive Prerogatives but not Board of Director members of a country. There are systems of checks and balances in our Western political systems.

Furthermore, the elected members of the Western countries’ legislative assemblies are NOT the actual members of the Board of Directors of each Western country.

None of such individuals could change the constitution of any country, write a new constitution, get rid of the Bill of Rights or amendments, then come up with the versions of such documents that they find that is more convenient for them to use as governing tools.

All that the members of the executive branch and legislative assemblies could achieve doing within the context of their operational jurisdictions are:

1) passing new laws as new governing tools in order to help them to better do their jobs within the contemporary context; and

2) making amendments to the laws and in case of the U.S. to the constitution, in order to better address the extant problems as is, here and now; and

* Note – this doesn’t happen in Canada.

3) come up with ministry and other forms of executive directives and policies as governing tools in order to serve the day-to-day operations of government.

Even a king cannot go ahead and say, “I am the king and could do whatever I want”. Such a king would be removed from power on a heart beat by the his own council, and the same institution of monarchy that ensures the resiliency of the monarchy and monarchs as the Heads of States.

In European and North American countries we do not have democracy as our political systems. The political systems throughout the world are either:

1) Constitutional Monarchy; or

2) Representative Constitutional Republic; or

3) Absolute Centralized Dictatorship; or

4) Transient System of Government.

In the Western world we could see the first two form of political systems, Constitutional Monarchy and Representative Constitutional Republic, where the people have rights, freedoms and civil liberties. Also, until before the creation of internet and social media, the public used to have some level of privacy which no longer exists.

The Absolute Centralized Dictatorships are the political systems that in such countries the people have no rights, freedoms and civil liberties. for example: North Korea.

The Transient System of Government is a form government that is going through its evolutionary process of coming out of being an Absolute Centralized Dictatorship and moving towards either becoming a Representative Constitutional Republic or Constitutional Monarchy.

In such cases it is most likely that the outcome would be moving towards becoming a Representative Constitutional Republic that its political system is similar to that of United States of America. For example: Iran and China are the two examples of a Transient System of Government going through such an evolutionary process.

Therefore, this idea of the U.S., Canada or European countries exporting the Western style liberal democracy to the rest of the world, is merely a feel good talking-point, that has harmed our Western interests since the end of the Second World War. This is because one cannot export something that they themselves do not have in the first place.

The ability to encourage the development of the governments throughout the world that respect their citizen’s rights, freedoms and civil liberties is a noble cause. We should be doping so.

However, such supports and encouragement of the other none Western countries, is feasible only after each one of the Western countries achieve such higher level of vibration of having the none contestable inalienable rights, freedoms and civil liberties. we could only becoming support o the others after we develop and implement the Active Rights that have built in self-enforcement mechanism.

In the Western world, we still live in a societies that majority of the people are so terrified by the notion of political correctness, that they cannot even communicate their simplest needs and feelings through the applications of Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression. This is because such a simple practice could affect their employability and means of putting bread on their table.

Until we don’t solve such extant problems concerning our own rights, freedoms and civil liberties, we neither have any right nor the moral high ground to interfere in other countries’ affairs by lecturing them about rights, freedoms and civil liberties. Charity begins at home.

When interacting with none Western countries, we only ought to focus on our own economic and financial interests. It is also essential to clearly communicate with none Western countries that they need to keep their conflicts outside our homelands.

© Copyright 2016 Joseph L. A.

%d bloggers like this: