Legislative changes are unavoidable in a democracy. People who are content with their current liberties feel they can do nothing and maintain comforts while people who aim to remove freedoms are busy organizing and voting. This is the nature and relationship between people and democracy. It’s a practice of mild authoritarianism distributed across the doers of a society. The remaining population relaxes and allows the will of the doers to become law; finding their freedoms incrementally diminished. Such is the explanation of the decline of apathetic societies containing decadent folks. Dictators and active participants of the legislative processes set the rule, and the rest get the stick. So it’s important to understand the reasoning why an inalienable standard of law and liberty among all people should be enforced and defended. Because democracy is a parasite that always kills its host.
Certainly the democratic process works for a reasonable amount of time. Societies have always felt comfortable with the idea and practice of voting for an outcome that would impact their environment. On the surface it sounds like a really good solution to determine the future of changes. But this system, like any system, is no exception to fallibility by the will of hackers. Psychologists have proven that when people are presented with a problem, more often than not, they will take the easy way out of it. The government complex has understood this human weakness for centuries and incrementally polarized the democratic process between two targets; republicans or democrats (Red vs. Blue). Both groups are “parties”; exactly as they are called, neither have any real critical thinkers among them and cannot function individually. Even if someone did, they will discredit their own if one goes outside partisanship. Ultimately, there has to be a manager for each party that sets the direction based on polling and the public atmosphere. Don’t misunderstand what I mean here. I’m simply saying both parties work together and the polling information is important to reformat Red and Blue talking points to effectively divide the nation. All of this is designed by the will of the corrupt.
Back to the psychology problem.. The voting systems of this time exploit the human inclination to choose easier solutions by having what they call a “Straight Party Vote”. This is effectively the easy-out for people that know very little of the candidates, yet wish to “GO VOTE” because it’s their right. Yes, people can actually go to the voting machine and hit a button marked ‘Vote Democrat’ and their ballot is automatically filled out. This practice betrays everything that is good about choice. What good is making choices if you have not a clue about the effects of your actions, or if your voting options are limited to horrible candidates. Choices between ones that don’t listen and ones that always lie aren’t real choices. If you wouldn’t vote for any of the selections, then perhaps the democratic process isn’t working for you. And I haven’t even begun to discuss the rampant fraud of these systems, the absence of real representation or the threat of corrupting forces. I will speak of these later.
Another common oversight with the democratic process is that people vote for what they want, and don’t concern themselves with the wants of others. This is a core flaw with the collectivist model. Being selfish is one thing but imposing your will on your neighbor is definitely repressive. Here’s a simple argument. If you don’t like guns, don’t own one. The moment you vote against the freedom of your neighbors to make those decisions for themselves is the day you become illiberal; undemocratic and restraining the freedom of others. The obvious irony of this particular argument is that the party calling themselves the “Democratic Party” champions the illegal action to disarm Americans; removing the public ability to choose for themselves. That’s not freedom. It is, however, the motions of authoritarians evolving toward totalitarianism. In fact, the majority of the effects of the legislative process is shockingly undemocratic regardless of party.
There is no solution to this problem. Democracy is still a collectivist model and will always bring societal ruin unless it is limited in how it is applied. Gee whiz, if only we had a masterful governing document written by the people that allowed all people particular unalienable rights while limiting the legislative powers of the senate and congress as well as the authority of the executive branch. That would be something I’d want to read.
-Jeremy Edward Dion