The Result of Democracy

Result of Societal Systems Based on Coercion

| Close Window | Equality | Importance | Determining Rightness | Main Web Site |

Synopsis

Democracy differs from other societal systems based on coercion such as dictatorships and monarchies only in style. All have a ruler and those ruled. And all laws must be obeyed under penalty of death. Else the system would collapse.

Individuals are increasingly forced to do things they do not wish to do. Things which may actually be immmoral and irrational. And and prevent from doing things they wish to do. Which may be moral and rational. This creates chaos and disorder in society.

Disclosure


Although I have been working on this for 50 years or so, this is a new approach to handling it. Starting over again, So everthing appears incomplete and nonsensical? The fate of all new and controversial knowledge. For now I will so no more than what I saw is right, Can not be wrong. As it is consistent with the laws of nature and history. That we have a very serious societal problem that needs solving, Else we will continue inexorably on our way to non-viability as a specie. That you should therefore bear with, read and learn. And not practice intellectual dishonesty.


The result…
which is the same as for dictatorships and monarchies. And they are societal systems based on coercion, yes? For American democracy the coercion has increased very slowly, from no noticeable coercion in the late 1600s to very much now. So slowly that many people do not notice, do not think about it. And do not believe that their “president” is a ruler and a dictator. Someone—something—is dictating behavior. If it is not the president, then who? Isn't it “where the buck stops?”, as they are fond of saying. And aren’t they the “Commander in Chief?”. Awesome powers, yes…?

Aldous Huxley said something very interesting in the foreword to the 1946 edition of his very prescient book Brave New World:

To deal with confusion, power has been centralised and government control increased. It is probable that all the world’s governments will be more or less totalitarian, even before they harnessing of atomic energy…

In the following paragraph he said:

A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all–powerful executive political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because the love their servitude.

Please, you really need to think about some very important elements and concepts in those two statements. First though, some perspective. I was just entering my teens in 1946 and I remember the feeling of freedom then. The “great war” (the second) had just finished. And political entities of the world were mainly concerned with rebuilding a shattered world. Not with ever-expanding laws for ever-–more control of the people. “Let the prosperity roll”. People wanted to be educated, and they knew that if they worked hard their would be more and better jobs. They didn’t want to be unemployed, sick, disabled; their were no “entitlements” if they did.

Think about depicting us as slaves. Well, aren’t we? What do you call it when there are many laws to tell you to do things you don’t want to do. Things that are often irrational and immoral. Many other laws to tell you things you may not do, most of which are rational and moral. And, they control your property. Think about the many ways they do that, the many things they control. And when someone controls your movemens and actions, that is part of the description of the criminal act of kidnapping.

They tighten the screws of coercion so slowly that you don’t recognized it. A bit like putting the lobster in the pot of cold water and putting it over a low flame. He will be boiled to death before he realizes it. Or, more appropriately, a thinking being would slowly realize it is getting hotter. Then maybe that this would not stop, but continue. And slowly it would reach a point at which you could do nothing about it. You couldn’t get out to protest the coercive act.

As we are slowly becoming non-viable as a society of thinking beings. With a societal system that requires us to take actions in life that are incompatible with the laws of nature under which we evolved as a thinking specie. The reason we continue to create societal problems that we can not fix.

Another way to look at it is if you could imagine that you went to another world for 5o years or so. And then returned to this one for a visit. A world of individual freedom, with unrestricted access to the world. And sole responsibility for your actions in life. You would be appalled at what you found at the place you had left. I remember in the late 40s I think it was, there was a railroad strike. Business was being effected. The then American ruler, Harry Truman, decided he would call out the Army to run the railroad. Effectively taking it over for a time. There was hue and cry that “… you can’t do this! You can&rquo;t interfere in a private business that way. It is illegal, etc.” But he did it, and there was no looking back. Now people demand “government action” to take over and control businesses.

I also remember flying then. You told the person at the counter you wanted a ticket to someplace. They looked up the price, wrote the ticket, you paid (usually in cash) and they gave you the ticket. It was good for one year and could be used or cashed in any time during that period. And if you flew one way and decided you wanted to stay more or less time, no problem. At check–in you handed them the ticket, they handed you a boarding pass. At the appropriate time you walked to the gate, through the gate, and out to your airplane and went in and sat down.

For various reasons I sometimes carried a .38 special revolver with me. At the airport I would mention it to the person at the counter who, perhaps busy with other things, would automatically say “Oh, yes, okay. Please show it to the Captain when you get on board. He may let you keep it, or want to keep in the cockpit”. Usually it was “Is it unloaded”? And when I said “Yes”, he would say “Oh, just keep it with you”.

Anyway… what I wanted to say was, there has been the &ldqjo;confusion in society” that Huxley predicted, yes? As we can not solve even one of our societal problems. A result of people being told what to do and what not to do. Not liking it, as it is not a normal part of thinking life. So the screws have been tightened, probably even more than Huxley could have envisioned. And, as he predicted, most people do not even notice. Oh, a little grumbling perhaps. But followed by “this is the price of freedom&dquo;. Does someone besides me have a problem with that statement? Do you actually believe you are free? That you can do anything you wish that does not intentionally degrade the quality of life of another person?

And shouldn’t that be how freedom and your access to the world be? That you can get on with making your life better, and no one will interfere in that unless you intentionally, wilfully, make the life of someone else worse? If that happened, it would always be referred to the Planetary Court of Justice.

Democracy is a societal system based on coercion, different only in style from a dictatorship or monarchy. The head of a democracy is a dictator, as the word means someone who dictates behavior for others to obey. If they aren’t dictating, then who is?

In a democracy there are representatives. Often called that, and also referred to as “senator”. They are supposed to represent you with the political régime, to get you what you want. But only a little thought confirms this is not possible. Although they can easily prevent people from getting things, both those they don’t want and those they do want.

Senators and representatives created unnatural or political law. It is actually concept of the law that controls the lives of people, rather than an individual. Constantly changing individuals administer the system.

In a political world the answer to all problems, to the supposed solving of problems, is “more laws, ‘better’ laws. More stringent enforcement of existing laws”. This is actually what creates our societal problems and makes them insoluble. As individuals are forced to do things (which may actually be immoral) they do not wish And are prevented from doing things they wish to do (which may be moral and rational), so they look for loopholes.

If a representative or senator does not create unnatural laws, then they will be replaced by someone who will. That is the system. “There must be [political] laws!” Otherwise everything will go to hell. With that statement I should not need to say more. It is what we have, both in the sense of having laws and living in hell.

A Non-purpose of Life…

Think of the incredible, beautiful, elegant, improbable 3+ billion year evolution from a single cell to a multi-trillion cell thinking being. Think of all the other species. Marvel at life such as the seahorse. Of what use is that, except to amaze you? But then, of what use are we, Homo sapiens

What is our reason for being here, and especially of what use is our societal system? After 3+ billion years of evolution to something that can engage in abstract thought, control their lives and be individually and solely responsible for the result, should we give that up? To all others to control our lives and effectively our thinking? And to then complain about the result&helllip;‽


Related subjects:

℗ Prototype 1971–∞ — Andrew J. Galambos — All Rights Reserved
© Copyright 1983–∞ — William W Morgan — All Rights Reserved