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 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
First, Democrats convince blacks that they can’t possibly achieve anything on their own. They can’t be expected to qualify for good schools without affirmative action. They couldn’t get a decent job without the assistance of benevolent white people. They can’t even be expected to raise their own children. And guess what? When you tell someone that they can’t do something and that we’ll do that for you, that is a perfect way to ensure that that person will stop trying. Why waste effort, when things are being taken care of for me? After all, I couldn’t do it anyway. I describe myself as a bleeding heart conservative because I loathe the destructive impact leftism has on the human soul.
Then Democrats did the same thing with whites. They told them they can’t accomplish anything on their own, from Obama’s “Julia” to Sen. Warren’s “You didn’t build that.” Now that any success enjoyed by a white person is due to white privilege and so on, even whites have been taught that they can’t achieve anything on their own, and that government should provide for them. Any white person that attempts to succeed on his or her own is described as racist and selfish. So why try?
Our founding fathers saw the purpose of the democratic process as a means of limiting the power of government. But our modern Democrat party takes a different view. Once you’ve convinced blacks, and whites, and everyone else that they can’t achieve on their own, you then establish government as a benevolent source of, well, everything. For everyone. Which makes government very powerful. Which makes those who control government very, very powerful. So our democratic process no longer limits the power of government as our founders intended – it increases the power of government. And the resulting increase in governmental power appears to follow an exponential curve.
Or, as Hemingway might say, the previously democratic government gains power gradually, and then suddenly.
As government begins to rapidly gain such enormous power, elections become too important to be left to chance, so the temptation to seek to control the outcomes of elections becomes irresistible. There’s just too much at stake.
At this point, democracy has been converted into tyranny.
And this is an especially powerful form of tyranny. The people are not likely to rise up to depose the leader, because they chose him. And if they do, they can’t just kill the king. The entire system has been built from the ground up to create centralized control systems, with enormous support from the news media, the educational establishment, federal & state bureaucracies, social media, cancel culture, peer pressure, and so on.
Encouraging weakness in individual citizens leads to enormous power in centralized government. Once a majority of citizens believe that they need a strong centralized government to help them, then that government becomes very powerful.
How can such a system be overturned? Once the entrenched power system becomes strong enough to control elections – even only partially – then they have absolute power. As described by Lord Acton, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Because everyone is on the take, not just the king. And then, that’s it. How can such a system be overturned?
It’s my understanding that when Thomas Jefferson first learned of the French Revolution, his first response was something like, “Good for them.” And once he learned how things were going, his next response was, “Oh my God…”
Our founding fathers feared the tyranny of the majority. And this was a major reason that they feared the use of government to redistribute wealth and power. When a law was proposed for the federal government to create a fund for widows of war veterans, James Madison was sympathetic to their cause, but responded with his famous line:
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”
There were many reasons for their caution in such matters. But I think they instinctively recognized that once our government got in the business of taking money away from some people and giving it to others, even with only the best of intentions, then their dream of limited government would have no chance of succeeding.
And that’s just with taxing and spending – they hadn’t even considered the limitless power that results from printing new money to buy votes. The government then takes on the role not just of Santa Claus, but also of God.
Would you vote against Santa Claus? What about God?
At that point, government has absolutely enormous power. And the leaders of the government also have absolutely enormous power.
A democratic government such as this has enormous power even with honest elections – who could vote against them? Only racist deplorables. Are you a racist deplorable? No? Well, then, vote for us. With the help of the news media, our educational system social media, etc, the opposition will have great difficulty winning elections.
But at some point, the government and its leaders become so powerful that there’s just too much at stake. Which makes elections of those leaders too important to be left to chance.
Which converts democracy into tyranny.
It all seems so nice. “Oh, you couldn’t possibly do that on your own. Let your government help you. Vote for me.” How nice.
And all that niceness converts democracy into a form of tyranny that is nearly impossible to overturn.
You know the saying: You can vote your way into socialism. But you’ll have to shoot your way out.Published in