Lion of the Blogosphere

The left abandoning democracy

Hermes writes in a comment:

I’ve noticed that the left has begun using “democracy” simply to denote the kind of society they favor. They’ll call some liberal principle or action “democratic” if it was enacted by an elite, unelected few, while calling the will of a majority of the people “anti-democratic” or “a threat to democracy” if it results in some non-liberal principle or action.

The kind of government the left wants can be properly called an aristocracy, rule by the elites.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 8, 2018 at EDT am

Posted in Politics

74 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. They seem to define democracy primarily in terms of “independent institutions” and “rule of law” (ie, rule by unelected experts).

    Michael Anton – “Will the real authoritarian please stand up?” https://www.claremont.org/crb/article/will-the-real-authoritarian-please-stand-up/

    IHTG

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • The “independent institutions” are of course run by elites and not by prole white Trump supporters.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

  2. “The kind of government the left wants can be properly called an aristocracy, rule by the elites.”

    Which, ironically, is traditionally the kind of government conservatives want.

    Peter Akuleyev

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • The left is showing us that an aristocracy based on noble lineage is much more competent than one based on SAT scores and virtue signaling.

      Stilicho

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • Probably because aristocrats act like owners, they want to preserve their society for their descendants. “Meritocratic” elites are more likely to exploit all they can, because their kids will eventually regress to the mean. Aristocrats also had some sense of noblesse oblige, and knew that they ruled by virtue of an external force (God, Providence, whatever), and could lose their position if they didn’t act somewhat conscientiously. Meritocratic elites believe they really deserve their position and feel entitled to spit on the losers.

        Peter Akuleyev

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • If they took out the virtue-signalling component of elite selection, and just kept the SAT, our elite would become the greatest in the world. A race of Ubermenschen.

        GondwanaMan

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • If you’re Aristocracy you’re supposed to have virtue already. Signaling it shows you’re lower class.

        Artifact

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Aristocracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.

        Artifact

        August 9, 2018 at EDT am

      • Charles Trevelyan wrote about this years ago. The problem with civil servants is that since they “earned” their jobs, they don’t feel the need to be pleasant to anyone. Meanwhile, someone who gets their job through connections must strive to maintain those connections.

        ScarletNumber

        August 9, 2018 at EDT am

    • In normal circumstances, I would much rather prefer rule by smart, educated elites than proles, but these are not normal circumstances.

      SD

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • American Conservatives/Republicans were historically just as elitist as liberals, they just supported a different elite (big business/religious authorities).

      Now conservatives aren’t as gung-ho anymore about the new tech/finance/political elite, the White population no longer have the most power per capita, and religion is not that important for younger conservatives. So theyve become anti-elitist.

      GondwanaMan

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • Although modern conservatives still respect law enforcement. That’s the most authoritarian aspect of the modern right.

        GondwanaMan

        August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Although modern conservatives still respect law enforcement. That’s the most authoritarian aspect of the modern right.”

        Because of fear of black crime, and not because they love the idea of a police state.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • True, partly because of fear of black crime, but conservatives in most societies and times tended to be more pro-police.

        GondwanaMan

        August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • For every proactive black crime, there is a reactive prole crime.

        Elites understand this symbiotic process of black n prole crime, hence the police state combats both elements as its job.

        JS

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

      • LOLWUT?? Is that some kinda “natural law” of American criminology?

        GondwanaMan

        August 11, 2018 at EDT am

    • But don’t forget William F. Buckley’s famous line: “I’d rather be ruled by the first 200 names in the Boston phone book than by the faculty of The Harvard Law school.”

      Marty

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • That’s true, I forgot about that line.

        GondwanaMan

        August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • True, but you have to remember Buckley was a Yale man.

        Peter Akuleyev

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Am I the only conservative in the U.S. who thinks Buckley’s claim was a bit absurd? It was probably made just to emphasize how little he thinks of the liberals in academia. The truth is Buckley as a man of the upper classes and and Ivy League graduate had far more in common with the people who made up the Harvard Law School faculty than he had with the people whose names were listed in the first 200 section of the Boston phone book. Social class counts for a lot, political ideology isn’t everything. In addition, the claim cost Buckley nothing since, by definition, most of the first 200 names in ANY city’s phone book will not be people who ever get anywhere hear the power structure. The time to have taken Buckley’s claim seriously would have been when he started socializing with ordinary people (of the “first 200” type) – something that, to my knowledge, he never tried doing.

        maryk (the g-loaded guidette)

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • He might’ve had a different opinion if it was the Botswana phone book.

        Panther of the Blogocube

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • In ancient times, aristocracy (“rule by the best”) was highly regarded, but so was sortition (random selection).

        Anthony

        August 10, 2018 at EDT pm

  3. This is where Progressivism was headed from the beginning. It’s just that Woodrow Wilson didn’t understand he would need 3rd World POCs to get there.

    Gazza90

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

  4. Seems like they want theocracy – rule by goodthinkers. In practice this always means rule by elites anyway, by the iron law of oligarchy. But they aren’t cool with some off- reservation optimates like the Kochs or the Olins.

    Handle

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

  5. The Left has never been in favor of democracy. To them, it’s just something to abuse in order to gain power for themselves. As such, democratic norms and forms should not be used to counter them, main force should be used instead and only those females deemed presentable enough to be used and bred should be kept alive.

    jonolan

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • “The Left has never been in favor of democracy. ”

      Wrong people come to genuinely believe in the arguments they are making. Democracy benefited leftists when blacks where the people who weren’t voting, but now the democracy means prole white votes, they are changing their minds.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 8, 2018 at EDT am

      • democracy means prole white votes,

        Trump barely won through a non democratic technicality. Trump has also made it clear he’s not going to significantly alter the demographics of the US. All democrats have to do is wait.

        Magnavox

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • bush won california in ’88.

        luke ford

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

    • “..barely won through a non-democratic technicality” – presume you are referring to the Electoral College. We can debate the “non-democratic technicality” bit, but what on earth makes you think Trump would not have won under different rules?

      There was no need for him to consider #votes because that wasn’t the game. If #votes had been the “rules of the game” then Trump’s strategy would have been entirely different. But let’s pretend otherwise shall we, if it soothes our hurt feelings.

      “..he’s not going to significantly alter the demographics of the US. All democrats have to do is wait.”

      Wishful thinking considering the awesome increases in approval ratings from Blacks and Hispanics. Plus the new immigration rules that favour high-IQ immigrants.

      gda

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I think he would have lost by more votes without the electoral college since large population deep blue states have huge reservoirs of demotivated non voters but I obviously don’t know for sure.

        Demographic change, which I don’t want and think is terrible, is baked into the cake even without any more immigration and Trump has done nothing to reduce immigration.

        Magnavox

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Look at KS and OH. Dems barely lost in OH, and whether Kobach won or not, it was by a hair.

        gothamette

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Not to mention Hillary didn’t win a majority of the popular vote, either, nor even did H. + Stein (Greens). Trump + Johnson (Libertarian) got a majority of the popular vote.

        You’d have to assume a system where a plurality of the popular vote should win the Presidency and that Trump wouldn’t have campaigned in California and other hard Blue states to make Hillary the winner. It’s only the insanity of motivated rationalizing that makes the deranged Democrat losers think they got robbed in 2016.

        savantissimo

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

  6. Actually the left prefers an oligarchy, particularly a judicial oligarchy in which major public policy decisions are decided by the courts, as long as they control who sits on the courts. That’s why the left had a crying jag unmatched since election night when Kennedy announced his retirement.

    Mike Street Station

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

  7. A few years ago I was in a TJ’s in line next to a pony-tailed guy about 70, an obvious original hippie, who was conversing with the cashier about hiw great it is that plastic bags are banned. I said to him, “remember when you were pro-freedom?” To which he replied, “that was a long time ago.”

    Marty

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • Lol. Great anecdote.

      Steverino@Steverino.com

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • What state do you live in where plastic bags are *banned*? Here in California, *single-use* plastic bags are banned. from grocery stores; you simply have to pay 10 cents for a re-usable plastic bag. The law is great! People are more likely to bring their own, but they can always buy a bag if they want. And, no, it didn’t lead to food-borne illness like critics contended or the demise of freedom. Now we have to deal with awful things like less litter. Hey, remember when you had the freedom to just throw shit out your car on the highway? Now the Gestapo will fine you for being a fucking slob. The horror.

        Vince

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • It is not about plastic bags. It is about everything. It can be single use plastic straws, plastic plates, or plastic cups. Then it will be single use syringes, single use diapers, single use tampons, single use condoms. And then it will be anything. You can make a random argument about any random product. Let’s prohibit brooms because whales choke on brooms. You know, sharks choke on see lions. So what?

        My 2¢

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

    • This is the basic fraud of the Enlightenment. The purpose of free speech was to simply remove the anti-Blasphemy laws that protected Christianity. The Enlightenment was basically an anti-Christian movement. Now that Christianity is all but destroyed, the Left can now put in place their own anti-Blasphemy laws.

      That is what the competition is about: who can define what is blasphemous?

      These are the new rules. Republicans should embrace playing by them.

      After it’s charter to do business in the US is revoked, I’m sure Google can make money re-opening in India and China and learning how to sell ads to the Indians and Chinese.

      map

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Republicans today are where the liberals were in the 1950s, 1950s censorship was conservative, but today censorship is liberal so Republicans must be totally pro free speech.

        Furthemore, as a blogger, I absolutely support the principle of free speech.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

  8. Guys, I really don’t think we have a traditional right/left division in the US. We have BIG CAPITAL running everything. Basically modern America is Apple, Inc. Look at it. The world’s 1st trillion dollar company, run by a colorless gay man. He offered his female employees free egg-freezing. Is this something out of a dystopian novel or what?

    gothamette

    August 8, 2018 at EDT am

    • gothamette just let out the secret. she should expect the black leather trench coats soon.

      luke ford

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • What? I don’t understand this.

        gothamette

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

  9. Bert Brecht, the East German communist, said, in such cases, when the people had forfeited the confidence of the government, that it might be easier to dissolve the current people and elect new ones.

    Black Death

    August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

  10. The Left — the current Left — believes that compassion-empathy based universalism (which leads to egalitarianism and environmentalism (because emotional people anthropomorphize) is the highest morality and only people who score the highest in this type of morality (approximately 15% of the population) should be making any decisions about anything. The other 85% they believe are “far-right” fascists.

    CamelCaseRob

    August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

    • I don’t think they really believe this. They don’t care about labor rights or pollution in China. They don’t care about women in Muslim countries. They don’t even care about crime in American cities. They just enjoy feeling morally superior within the comfort of their bubble.

      Steverino@Steverino.com

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • They’re very confused and inconsistent. Why? Because unbridled empathy is an extremely poor basis for decision making. They fall prey to a number of cognitive biases including psychic numbing, and prominence bias. They’re totally freaked out about the possibility of mild rudeness of the wrong kind on public transportation, but don’t care at all about stonings and honor killings.

        This is not because leftist empaths are willful hypocrites, but because they’re not playing with a full deck. Some of them also worry about the feelings of vegetables in the produce section of a grocery store.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “Some of them also worry about the feelings of vegetables in the produce section of a grocery store.”

        Only root vegetables like potatoes or carrots, because that’s ripping the plant out of the ground.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • As a resident of Park Slope Brooklyn, you are 100% right. They are very comfortable and morally superior in their bubble.

        The problem is they have a lot of influence outside of their bubble because they run the corporations, and/or the corporations are highly sympathetic to them. I suspect most CEOs’ wivesand daughters are lefties.

        So we have the almost satirical example of the plastic straws. What is it? .0000001% of plastic pollution? But many many corporations proudly announced they were giving up plastic straws. And everybody in the bubble was happy. Including the media, of course.

        amused observer

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • It probably just lowers the price of polyethylene, making it more likely that it will be used for something else.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • ““Some of them also worry about the feelings of vegetables in the produce section of a grocery store.”

        Only root vegetables like potatoes or carrots, because that’s ripping the plant out of the ground.”

        No. Specifically I was thinking about a guy describing what it was like to have a super empathic wife. They went to a grocery store, and noticed that one of the vegetables in the produce section was misshapen.

        Then on the drive home she started crying. He said: “You’re thinking about that vegetable in the grocery store aren’t you.” She said: “Yes. Nobody’s going to want it.” They turned around, drove back, bought it, and then drove home.

        I thought this was totally wrong. If you’re buying the thing, presumably you’re going to cut it up and eat it. So how is that doing it a favor? Let alone the fact that it doesn’t actually have feelings.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • Captain Kirk wouldn’t have gone back to buy the vegetable.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “Then on the drive home she started crying. He said: “You’re thinking about that vegetable in the grocery store aren’t you.” She said: “Yes. Nobody’s going to want it.” They turned around, drove back, bought it, and then drove home.”

        Man, that would be hard to live with.

        Mike Street Station

        August 9, 2018 at EDT am

      • L. Aurunculeius Cotta

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

    • The left only believes in anti-white communism.

      map

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

  11. i learned from destructure that rich people should be taxed until they advocate to have their taxes lowered.

    luke ford

    August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

    • because the problem with rich people is they want their taxes raised.

      luke ford

      August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “because the problem with rich people is they want their taxes raised.”

        That’s what I’ve been writing for a long time now.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I once quipped that if the rich want their taxes raised so much then we should give them what they want until they’ve had enough. But that was years ago.

        More recently, I said something to the effect of “the problem with the rich is not that they’re rich but that their money insulates them from the negative consequences of bad policies while simultaneously increasing their ability to promote those bad policies.”

        destructure

        August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

      • 72 words of autism is still autism.

        luke ford

        August 9, 2018 at EDT am

      • According to the wc program that is 72 words. Using wc is the slightly less autistic way to arrive at that number.

        Destructure is just angry when rich people promote social liberalism. Everything he says also applies to the rich’s history of promoting economic exploitation that they benefit from but that he’s perfectly OK with.

        Magnavox

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

      • The don’t care about taxes because they don’t pay any, they’ve figured out that controlling assets you never liquidate is as good as ‘owning’ things. Just borrow against the assets and keep rolling over the loans. Or, turn your assets, if large enough, into an charity that you control. Make yourself manager of the charity, give your car and house to the charity, and tour living expenses become management expenses.

        I might have details wrong, but that’s my rough impression of how things work.

        Curle

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

      • I keep seeing this logic in the comments, and it’s totally false. People vote against their own interests all the time. SWPLs vote to favor blacks over whites. Rich will voter to favor poorer people over themselves if they get convinced that’s low class or uncouth to vote for lower taxes for themselves.

        Rich people, overwhelmed by the proleness of Trump, would rather be seen publicly supporting the high-class SWPL candidate even if it means they pay higher taxes.

        To the extent that there are loopholes, and yes there are loopholes, if there was any political will by Republicans to close them, they could be closed. I don’t see Dems voting against a bill that makes rich people pay more taxes by closing loopholes. But Republicans tend to see tax loopholes as fast ones they pulled on the Democrats.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “SWPLs vote to favor blacks over whites.“

        When they vote to favor stronger antitrust enforcement I may come over to your point of view.

        The high-low coalition exists to the mutual benefit of both.

        Curle

        August 9, 2018 at EDT pm

      • “To the extent that there are loopholes, and yes there are loopholes, if there was any political will by Republicans to close them, they could be closed. I don’t see Dems voting against a bill that makes rich people pay more taxes by closing loopholes.”

        Liberals went crazy over the part in the last tax bill that limited the deduction for state & local taxes to “only” $10,000. That seems crazy generous to me but on political forums that became the largest issue of contention, because it was a tax loophole that was tightened up that specifically rich people in Blue states used. When Dems take power again that loophole will be back in full force.

        Mike Street Station

        August 10, 2018 at EDT am

      • Well in a bill that created all sorts of new loopholes, they removed the one that benefits high-tax blue states. Which was smart politics by the Republicans!

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 10, 2018 at EDT am

      • “Destructure is just angry when rich people promote social liberalism.”

        Absolutely. Social liberalism increases violent crime, drug overdoses, illegitimacy, child molestation and aids. Anyone who isn’t angry about policies that increase those things is a turd.

        destructure

        August 10, 2018 at EDT am

  12. i think rich people should be punished with high taxes until they support candidates who are pro slavery, serfdom, and absolute monarchy.

    luke ford

    August 8, 2018 at EDT pm

  13. libertarianism is a form of autism.

    a very dangerous form of autism.

    luke ford

    August 9, 2018 at EDT am

  14. The “left,” not (R)ight and not being wrong, is self-annihilation. Ergo, where a mass of semi-concious self-annihilators go, ie., soft liberals roam, a “default elite.”

    But CERTAINLY NOT an aristocracy of anti-(S)upremacy…

    Rather, a homoocracy of unfathomable sexual degeneracy.

    thordaddy

    August 9, 2018 at EDT am

  15. The Libertarians have been driving the spread of freer-market democracy for the last few decades, what they camm stage-1 libertarianism, so the far-left is checking out, not that they were that good at democracy anyway.

    The Libertarians have a stage 2 ‘libertarian-direction’ model, Florida, which has replaced Switzerland and has about 16% libertarian-leaning voters. That’s what they want to bring to all countries next.

    Robert

    August 9, 2018 at EDT am

    • *what they call stage 1

      Robert

      August 9, 2018 at EDT am

    • They’re nuts if they think Florida is in any way going Libertarian. It’s heading towards blue state status due to heavy Puerto Rican migration over the past few years due to the economic collapse there and the hurricane.

      Mike Street Station

      August 10, 2018 at EDT am


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: