Democracy- Whats So Good About It?

Democracy: What's So Good About It?

 

There is a very big assumption here in the Fatherland that democracy is worth dying for, or at the very least, fighting for. I look around at the world to see if I can find examples of this principle by which we supposedly live. We've spent trillions of dollars trying to make it true, yet I can't find one example which illustrates that if you get rid of the people who bother you by sterilizing the political climate of any country and integrating ideas of democracy (but not equality) that the country will just naturally move in that direction. It hasn't happened yet. In fact, the contradiction corollary 9 Which is one thing follows another) kicks in. The more one nation fucks with another, the nationalistic tendencies of the oppressed nation turn toward fascism, that is, nationalistic opposition to the oppressor.

Since I can't find any recent examples, most notably, the current candidates, Iraq and Afghanistan where those countries were significantly changed for the better, that is, swinging toward Democracy ( but not equality), I have to return to the past, even far back in the past but I'll stop at 1776, where I find the beginning of the myth that Democracy is worth fighting and possibly dying for. 1776 is the Fatherland's First Big Historical Moment where people who had left the oppression of their previous Homelands started a nationalistic revolution against One of the countries that they had come from.

But was it for democracy? No, it was because England interfered in the economy of the scattered business and cultural enterprises which America was comprised of. America was essentially thirteen colonies composed of various religious and cultural groups who pretty much wanted to be left alone or wanted to be able to enter into their own contracts or negotiations with others outside the colony.

Yes, some colonies were established by the Mother country, thus creating a situation which lives on to this day, that land owned by absentee landlords is still owned by absentee landlords.

Since there was no government, there was no voting on a grand scale and the voting that did exist was a limited democracy based on land ownership, sex, race exclusion type of democracy. So when the Revolutionary War broke out, it wasn't Democracy on people's mind but how to keep England from telling them what to do. Freedom is what it was about, not democracy.

Unfortunately, democracy is nationalistic in principal and naturally then is always limited to those who control the economy, the military, and the politics. Universal revolutionary principals should exclude nationalism and patriotism as motivators and include universal non-nationalistic, economic, and international socialistic institutions.

What is Democracy, anyway? Democracy is the institutionalized arrangement of Power, sanctioned by the Ruling interests that control the resources. It would be no good thing allowing common ordinary people to own land until the land and its ownership is pre-ordained, then more people can vote, once they understood what they vote for. Fifty one percent of the people can't vote to redistribute the land so that everyone gets the same amount of land because it has already been established (pre-democratically) that the land belongs to certain others and is not to be usurped, democratically or not.

In other words, in a democracy you cannot overthrow the current basis for ownership, rescind indebtedness, eliminate inequalities of wealth and power simply by voting for it. Even if radical or revolutionary people are elected to any particular position, they cant govern in any other way except the established way. They ultimately are relegated to being servants of those already established unequal laws, bent regulations, and institutionalized standards instituted pre-democratically because the freedom of those who currently have property (lots of property), money (lots of money), power (lots of power) has been established and institutionalized.

Besides, if you are successful in changing peoples minds, which, in some instances, is currently happening, such as with racist, anti- prejudicial ("prejudicial" coming from the term "to pre judge"), eliminating statues and the names of racist historical figures, previously deemed worthy of historical illustrations of heroism, such as our forefathers, constitutional founders, then you can count on the system bending only so much before the backlash of those who claim to love their country, nationalism, patriotism, the two twins of fascism.

But the fact revolutions are rarely successful is no excuse to keep from trying. Try, try again.

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows