Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 40 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
“Democracy”
Apparently, the sustained attacks claiming that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy have some persistent traction in the polls. “Democracy” (sometimes called “our democracy”) is a strange ideological chimera. Most people probably assume that the Democrats are referring to the January 6th fiasco, which they call an “insurrection,” aided by Trump’s alleged endorsement of the riot. But there is a broader and deeper weirdness at work. “Democracy” turns out to be quite malleable.
First off, an election is not “democracy” when the wrong guy wins (e.g., Trump, Viktor Orbán, Benjamin Netanyahu). When voters pass referendums by voting in what is normally considered a democratic act, their will does not count if not consistent with “democracy” (i.e., spending caps, no race quotas, no aid to illegals, and no homosexual marriage are all barred by “democracy”).
The fundamental organizational problem in America is that conservatives recognize that democracy requires widely shared cultural, moral, and social elements to survive, whereas liberals believe that even acknowledging those concerns ushers in authoritarian rule. Conservatives are beginning to realize that winning elections does not create the means to restore moral and cultural health, because even under supposed conservative rule, liberals continue to undermine the prerequisites of actual democracy through every captured institution. I don’t see a happy ending. Weimar degeneracy led to democracy dissolving into a death struggle between Nazis and Communists, each of whom sought to create a “democracy.”
A guy who wants to wear dresses and change his name to Louise presents an illustrative issue. The authoritarian approach would be to tell him his behavior is absurd and repellent and to knock it off. The “democracy” position is that all of us must pretend he actually is a woman under penalty of law. A modest democratic solution might be to let “Louise” do his thing up to but not past the point at which the rest of us are required to buy into and actively accommodate his delusion. However, under “democracy,” that last approach is forbidden because it tacitly honors the kinds of beliefs and values that an authoritarian would have. Sharing the same family values as Generalissimo Franco or Mitt Romney is an implicit rejection of “democracy.” This is why such notions must be actively suppressed and excluded.
The “right” of indigents to camp and crap on city streets, the “rights” of shoplifters, and the “rights” of border violators all make sense if “democracy” is an ideological assault on every distinction, limitation, and value that makes ordered liberty possible, to be replaced with complete global equality.
Actual democracy cannot be permitted to inhibit what “democracy” demands. In much the same way that the pigs in Orwell’s Animal Farm claimed to support equality while also claiming that some (the pigs) are more equal than others, the American “elite” no longer pretends that “democracy” is about majority rule under a constitutional system of law. It is only democracy when they get their way. You would think that voters in a democracy would notice and overwhelmingly reject that arrogance.
Published in Election 2024
I’m so sick of it. Okay, I understand that they’ve taken over every institution. How could we let that happen? And how can we let it continue?? As long as the media supports their definitions, I think we are lost.
There is no doubt in my mind that our current Democrat elite are not thinking “Freedom” when they promote “our Democracy”.
Good post OB. It’s not enough to allow for deviation from normal millennia long norms of human behavior. We must legitimize deviancy and promote it or we are, oddly enough, considered deviant, a new type of deviant that is not allowed. I guess they have standards after all.
That’s how we’re getting the party of perverts and baby killers calling a married man who promotes a strong family weird. They’re so enveloped in deviancy that a normal person is strange to them.
I wonder to what extent the representative aspect of our democracy works, or perhaps worked, to prevent the kind of conflation of democracy and, what, hyper-tolerant value neutral egalitarianism? you describe.
Once upon a time, when the people voted and their representatives then governed from far away and generally out-of-sight, it was probably easier to avoid the social peer pressure that today has people using made-up pronouns.
Anyway, I’m glad to see conversation becoming more frequent here about the real differences between left/right, conservative/radical, etc.
Most importantly, can we stop it? How (without eliminating democracy, that is)? Is it possible? I just don’t see how.
I targeted the media in my comment, but social media has also demanded compliance. If one doesn’t get you, the other will.
Even to the point of rejecting the voter’s choice when it becomes apparent he can’t win and installing someone else.
Sorry, we can’t have that much Democracy!
I actually had a liberal friend ask me “Do I believe that Democracy (with a capital “D” of course) is at stake in this election”? I said yes. I could see her relax as we now had a point of agreement, until I said that I was worried that the Democrats would completely destroy our Republic (which I reminded her we were) if elected. I said I wasn’t at all worried about Trump doing the same.
Shock and horror! But I was given a chance to explain why and I rattled off the litany. Ignoring Supreme Court Rulings, ignoring the will of Democrat voters in selecting a candidate, destroying the notion of American citizenship through unlimited illegal immigration – those have already been demonstrated. And the things they will try if elected: Trying to pack the Supreme Court, getting rid of the filibuster, adding DC as a state. I said that all of the protections we have for ensuring a functioning 50:50 country have been and would be tossed.
Didn’t change any minds of course, but it was satisfying.
Love it!
I usually ask for all the times Trump sicced the IRS on his enemies while in office compared to what Obama did to every conservative group trying to mobilize for 2020.
I then ask for all of the Obama officials prosecuted by the DOJ or state DAs compared to every lawyer who ever worked for Trump, General Flynn or Geoge Papadoupolus.
Then I ask for all the times the Trump Administration lied to FSIA courts to tap opposing political campaigns.
Then we need to list the times Trump said he would defy the Supreme Court and do what he wanted anyway as Biden has done.
I then conclude that it is OK to disagree about policy and there are reasons not to like Donald Trump but the pretense that your side is in favor of law, democracy, and respecting due process is a crock and that you mindlessly echo it with no effort to know what you are talking about makes you an ignorant herd animal. Don’t be an ignorant herd animal.
Once in a while I point out that some people have very good reasons for voting against Donald Trump. But then those same people do a quick 180 turn and say they’ll vote for Harris. Weird.
I find it seems to disarm and confuse people when an obvious Trump supporter concedes some defect or other in the Orange Man. Democrats increasingly give off a vaguely North Korean loyalty vibe when talking about their candidates. An Obama legacy?
If all goes well, the conversation reaches the ultimate issue: Given that we agree on some negatives about Trump, now ask yourself how it is that tens of millions of sentient, educated Americans also see those defects and are still willing, even enthusiastic about voting for such a man? What does that say about just how badly you people suck as a party and how awful your candidate is that Donald Trump is preferable? What is it about your side that drives people far better informed about issues and policy than you are (like moi) to vote for Trump? Now can we talk about your side’s defects?
To Democrats “Democracy” means “Communist revolution”. The voice of the people only matters, when it can be used to overturn a government that The Party does not like.
Making an admission against interest is a powerful rhetorical tool. Many times I’ve said to someone while having an argument, “Okay, I can actually see your point, and there’s a lot of that with which I can agree” only to hear in response something like “well you’ve got a point too, I’ll acknowledge that.”
The left’s caricature of Trump supporters is that his supporters all believe that Trump can do no wrong. The right’s caricature of the left is that they’re all evil perverts.
Like all good caricatures, there’s a little bit of truth captured in the exaggeration.
Actually I acknowledge more diversity in their ranks: evil perverts, dupes, bitter dumped girlfriends, wannabes, policy grifters, more dupes, faux academics, race hustlers and “journalists”
You omitted Lizard People — though they are admittedly only a small fraction of the left.
RFK, Jr., in his speech endorsing Donald Trump, described perfectly how I feel about the Democrats versus Republicans these days. His most important issues were (a) the lawfare used against Trump and (b) the suppression of dissenting opinions.
The Democrats in my parents’ and grandparents’ generations were not at all like the current Democrats. They lived to argue. Jail or silence or sue your opponents? Good heavens, no. Then you’d have no one to argue with. :) :) Argument is what got them all out of bed in the morning. :) :)
Frankly, Trump reminds me a lot of some of those old timers. His roots in the neighborhood bar where the construction site hardhats used to have a beer or two and a good argument before heading home are so obvious to me. :) I knew people like him. They were constantly jousting with other people, and he who got the best and longest laugh won the day. :)
After the Biden administration locked up the J6 protesters, I tried to think of anyone that Trump had hurt in that way, and I couldn’t think of anyone. Maybe he did, but I couldn’t, and still can’t, think of anyone. And the list of those–like Juliani, the owner of My Pillow, and so on and so on–whom the Democrats have driven into bankruptcy has continued to grow under the Democrats. The Clintons did this sort of thing constantly. It has become the operating system for the Democratic Party.
Hey, Democrats, why don’t you try the old-fashioned way: He who makes the best argument wins!
Now that is a democracy. :) :)
Agreed. And I’d go one further: Not all of the current Democrats are like the Democrats who run the Democratic Party. That’s worth remembering when we’re talking to people who may be Democrats but who really don’t want to buy into all of the fringe stuff to which the Democratic Party has surrendered.
The Kennedy and Gabbard rejections of the Democratic Party are important, especially right now, but in the long run it would be even better if normal Democrats began reclaiming their party from the radical left.
I completely agree! We can only hope that “normal” Dems will one day fight back. But I’m not holding my breath.
Kamala, on the other hand, has been prescribing the wrong things both as Senator and as Vice President. Recently, she has reversed some of the wrong things. If the campaign were somehow to be extended six months, she’d be Mitt Romney by Election Day.
And then Kamala again the day after.
same with the people who complain about “the norms” being violated and then want to change the number of justices on the SC or eliminate the filibuster.
Once one has come to understand that the Constitution is an impediment to progress, a musty old piece of parchment not to be taken too seriously, burning down the institutions seems a lot less edgy.
The Constitution was written by a bunch of white male gun dealers, oil companies and slave owners like Abraham Lincoln and Daniel Boone so why bother with it?
I sense an ally in our fight against the patriarchy!
It is a cultural problem. The Frankfurt School predicted long ago that that was their path to implement Marxism here, and they were right.
And then herself again after the inauguration.
We’ll get whomever her handlers decide she is no matter who we think we’re electing.
Carville lives!