The Inevitability of Moral Breakdown in Democracies Where All Can Vote

AntoniusofEfa

Woodpecker
No parasite is going to vote away a free lunch (or free anything). The only way to redo the system is to make a law, that permits voting rights only to taxpayers. This includes property tax owners.
 

DanielH

Robin
No parasite is going to vote away a free lunch (or free anything). The only way to redo the system is to make a law, that permits voting rights only to taxpayers. This includes property tax owners.
Never going to happen, as the non taxpayer voting class is only getting bigger over time. There will be a collapse, or at least a long period of austerity. It's best to just get right with God and make the connections and preparations necessary to survive whatever is coming.
 

Seadog

Kingfisher
Never going to happen, as the non taxpayer voting class is only getting bigger over time. There will be a collapse, or at least a long period of austerity. It's best to just get right with God and make the connections and preparations necessary to survive whatever is coming.
I always found this quote by a guy named Alexander Fraser Tytler interesting. I think it paraphrases and may have been influenced a bit by Aristotle's and Plato's thoughts on democracy.

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage
In short, a democracy will last until the bottom 51% discovers it can vote themselves the cumulative wealth of the top 49%, which gets wasted on blow and rims vs productive assets, and in turn destroys the society. I'm genuinely not sure the solution. While I think responsible, taxpaying people are definitely more far sighted, better able to discern what's the better for society vs themselves and lean in that direction, I think it's a fools paradise to think that a majority of those people would vote themselves worse off for the betterment of the people. That seems to be the selfless realm of people like founding fathers, or people who join military for purely noble reasons (vs just a pay check)
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
...
That's why they limited voting to landowners. They would probably have never imagined that in just over a century or so everyone would receive the right to vote and begin America's self destruction.
...
They may not have imagined it, but it was in the making from the very beginning.

As I’ve said before in other threads, universal suffrage was not a deviation from Americanism. It was simply the next step; the logical conclusion of liberalism.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
They may not have imagined it, but it was in the making from the very beginning.

As I’ve said before in other threads, universal suffrage was not a deviation from Americanism. It was simply the next step; the logical conclusion of liberalism.
It is, but not only that, democratic government - which can be liberal or iliberal (like communism or nazism) - is innevitable in an industrial system. Industrialism creates mass product but also mass man - the person ceases to be part of a local community and have a local identity and becomes part of the collective and have collective identity (be it national or international as we have now - the national is really just a stage in the process to the international). Democracy - that is, the identification of the people with the government, and regardless of political process - is an inevitability of the industrial world.
 

jakester318

Sparrow
I obviously posted my topic to have a discussion because I'm by no means a prophet.

I think it comes down to objective of belief. I've met a number of Christians that believe in simply aligning your life with God and then doing nothing further. Embracing one's persecution by the rest of the world is the pinnacle of one's faith. These people seek to influence nothing in the world at large because God is in control and nothing they do will matter. I've heard similar accounts by stoics as well.

Is this the right answer? Is there no taste to the salt of this earth that we men represent? Men can enact change in this life through their actions. You see the results of decisions you and others make everyday. I propose choosing to act. This life may not matter but there's no reason it needs to be an unpleasant experience. Why not choose to enact positive change or at least create communities of similar faiths/beliefs/morals that try to act as strength against the persecution and oppression that exists today?

Everyone thinks their religion is superior. I'm no good on arguing about religious superiority but it appears to be from the study I've done that every religion shares fairly common moral structures in actuality anyway.
These are difficult questions. It seems that one way Christianity would answer this is that life in this world is fleeting, it was never intended to satisfy what people crave deep down. All of us crave the same things (mostly): that our lives would have meaning, that there would be justice, and that I could have a little slice of the pie and have some prosperity. But this world doesn't deliver on any of that, although maybe the 1% would argue differently, I don't know. Jesus said that in his father's kingdom are many mansions and that he went away to prepare the way for his people to join him someday. Jesus elaborated more by saying that a man shouldn't store up treasures in this world because they are easily destroyed by various means. And lastly, the Apostle said not love the world nor the things of the world because friendship with the world is enmity with God. It would seem to me then that what we're being told is that the world we live in is temporary and that there exists yet a world that is superior to this and we must follow Jesus if we want exist in that world. But that requires a certain amount of callousness to this world. I guess we should not be as concerned about changing it or fighting for justice in it because it's going to pass away.

It would seem then by some people's standards that Christians align themselves to God and do nothing else because in reality, they are commanded to. They are commanded to give a defense of their faith so that others would know the hope they have. They are commanded to pursue righteousness and to be an example of a god-fearing person. But to actively go out and change the world, I don't know that anyone has really done that; not in any lasting way.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
It is, but not only that, democratic government - which can be liberal or iliberal (like communism or nazism) - is innevitable in an industrial system. Industrialism creates mass product but also mass man - the person ceases to be part of a local community and have a local identity and becomes part of the collective and have collective identity (be it national or international as we have now - the national is really just a stage in the process to the international). Democracy - that is, the identification of the people with the government, and regardless of political process - is an inevitability of the industrial world.
Interesting take.

So you don’t think it’s possible to have an authoritarian king rule over a modern industrialized country?

I’m not saying it would be ideal, but I’d have thought it is at least theoretically possible.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
Interesting take.

So you don’t think it’s possible to have an authoritarian king rule over a modern industrialized country?

I’m not saying it would be ideal, but I’d have thought it is at least theoretically possible.
I think it's possible, at least in theory, and for a limited time. But the key thing is that such a king would be indistinguishable from any other charismatic leader.

I think people confuse medieval kingship and modern authoritarianism. Not only were medieval kings extremely limited in their power, due to subsidiarity (which is related to the level of applied technique available - ie, technological development) but also important here, they weren't even part of the same people that they ruled. Not even in Germanic countries, where the nobility was much closer genetically to the people, they were still disparate - the royal houses were from noble Scythian descent, whereas the lower Germanic people were of lower descent. And this was a divergence in people for thousands of years.

So, in essence, the rulers were not identified with the ruled in any way - except for local powers. The higher you went, the more distant the people were from the royals. In an industrial society, no government lasts unless the mass identifies with the government. Society is too integrated and there's too much vertical social mobility for there to be any equilibrium. That's essentially the key difference: sane societies are integrated horizontally, not vertically. Insane societies are the opposite.
 
Last edited:

Rob Banks

Pelican
...kings...weren't even part of the same people that they ruled...

So, in essence, the rulers were not identified with the ruled in any way - except for local powers. The higher you went, the more distant the people were from the royals...
How is this good?

Most people would argue that a king should feel connected to and care about his people. Genetic similarity seems like it would be conducive to this.

I’m not disagreeing with you. Just want to know your reasoning as to why genetic similarity between kings and their subjects would be a bad thing.
 

ilostabet

Pelican
How is this good?

Most people would argue that a king should feel connected to and care about his people. Genetic similarity seems like it would be conducive to this.

I’m not disagreeing with you. Just want to know your reasoning as to why genetic similarity between kings and their subjects would be a bad thing.
Because not all people, and not all bloodlines, are meant to rule. But again, it only becomes a problem if the ruling class has extraordinary power - which they did not in the Middle Ages.

The King should care about his Kingdom. The lower nobles should care about their regions. And the lords should care about their provinces. Eventually you reach the lower people, and the people above them do have some connection with them. This is subsidiarity. There is no people-king. There is people-lords-nobles-kings. All groups are invested in the one right above or below them. The same with the Church. The commoner doesn't go directly to the Pope.

It might seem a paradox, but it is obvious now in hindsight that when the rulers were 'disconnected' from the people, they took much better care of them (and took a long-term view towards the stability of the kingdom) than do democratic rulers.
 

Gremlin

Sparrow
Yeah the problem with the alt right is they are doing a great job breaking down layers of corruption and exposing the west as a pure oligarchy, but don't have a valid plan for building a new system.
Here's a start in a nutshell in no particular order.

1. Destroy all forms of equality (public schools, affirmative action, welfare, the Keynesian economy, all Marxist social movements)
2. Repatriation with reparations of all forms of diversity (racial, ethnic, religious)
3. Topple democratic and prole rule government, bureaucracy and institutions
4. Limit the power of corporations and eliminate any corporation that works against the interests of the ethnonationalist culture
5. Exile all leftists by any means necessary

Take a 180 and...

1. Create a monarchy and a nobility based on leadership ability, intelligence and moral character
2. Create a caste system where everyone has an important place of varying degrees and also limits the need for social mobility, which drives proles towards peasant revolts backed by the bourgeoisie (otherwise known as class warfare)
3. Restore ethnonationalism
4. Restore the family unit, restore natural rights as opposed to civil rights, restore focus on religious esotericism
5. Limit education based on intelligence and potential
6. Good to the the good, bad to the bad, ignore everyone else (Plato and the bell curve)
7. Ethnic self-interest, self-determination and self-reliance with no meddling with, guilt or "Jesus saves" neo-con boomerism towards humanity's screw-ups
8. Deep drive towards ecology and restoration of nature
9. Limit work to the necessary, increase free time for family and living life
10. Restore capitalism in servitude to culture. I don't buy the US is anything but crony capitalism and heavily socialist
 
Last edited:

Rob Banks

Pelican
Here's a start in a nutshell in no particular order.

1. Destroy all forms of equality (public schools, affirmative action, welfare, the Keynesian economy, all Marxist social movements)
2. Repatriation with reparations of all forms of diversity (racial, ethnic, religious)
3. Topple democratic and prole rule government, bureaucracy and institutions
4. Limit the power of corporations and eliminate any corporation that works against the interests of the ethnonationalist culture
5. Exile all leftists by any means necessary

Take a 180 and...

1. Create a monarchy and a nobility based on leadership ability, intelligence and moral character
2. Create a caste system where everyone has an important place of varying degrees and also limits the need for social mobility, which drives proles towards peasant revolts backed by the bourgeoisie (otherwise known as class warfare)
3. Restore ethnonationalism
4. Restore the family unit, restore natural rights as opposed to civil rights, restore focus on religious esotericism
5. Limit education based on intelligence and potential
6. Good to the the good, bad to the bad, ignore everyone else (Plato and the bell curve)
7. Ethnic self-interest, self-determination and self-reliance with no meddling with, guilt or "Jesus saves" neo-con boomerism towards humanity's screw-ups
8. Deep drive towards ecology and restoration of nature
9. Limit work to the necessary, increase free time for family and living life
10. Restore capitalism in servitude to culture. I don't buy the US is anything but crony capitalism and heavily socialist
I have a better idea:

1. Destroy industrialism and technology.

2. Destroy all ideologies (including ethno-nationalism and other right-wing ideologies) and replace them with Jesus.

I’m not sure #1 is possible, and even if it were possible, it would result in lots of death and destruction. But I don’t think there’s any alternative way.
 

Elipe

Woodpecker
I have a better idea:

1. Destroy industrialism and technology.

2. Destroy all ideologies (including ethno-nationalism and other right-wing ideologies) and replace them with Jesus.

I’m not sure #1 is possible, and even if it were possible, it would result in lots of death and destruction. But I don’t think there’s any alternative way.
If you mean destroy industrialism and technology globally and destroyed all knowledge of how to rebuild technology... yeah, not happening. If you meant just for your own country, that's an invitation for foreign invasion and occupation.

And how do you replace all ideologies with Jesus? I mean, Jesus's teachings are so deep and complex that there are a lot of different political/economic systems that could be considered consistent with Jesus's teachings. And that's not even getting into the Catholic/Protestant divide.

You forget that we live in a fallen world, and that we ourselves are fallen creatures. A fallen world cannot be and never ever ever will be perfect. Every ideology will inevitably have a point of failure because all ideologies must work with fallen creatures, many of whom will seek to exploit the system for as much personal/tribal gain as possible. God's Kingdom, after the Resurrection, will be the only government in the history of all creation and eternity that is absolutely perfect and has no flaws or weaknesses. When men run government, government will inevitably fail over time. But when Jesus Christ runs government as its King, it will never pass away or be the cause of sorrows and woes.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
If you mean destroy industrialism and technology globally and destroyed all knowledge of how to rebuild technology... yeah, not happening. If you meant just for your own country, that's an invitation for foreign invasion and occupation.

And how do you replace all ideologies with Jesus? I mean, Jesus's teachings are so deep and complex that there are a lot of different political/economic systems that could be considered consistent with Jesus's teachings. And that's not even getting into the Catholic/Protestant divide.

You forget that we live in a fallen world, and that we ourselves are fallen creatures. A fallen world cannot be and never ever ever will be perfect. Every ideology will inevitably have a point of failure because all ideologies must work with fallen creatures, many of whom will seek to exploit the system for as much personal/tribal gain as possible. God's Kingdom, after the Resurrection, will be the only government in the history of all creation and eternity that is absolutely perfect and has no flaws or weaknesses. When men run government, government will inevitably fail over time. But when Jesus Christ runs government as its King, it will never pass away or be the cause of sorrows and woes.
The destruction of technology and industry would obviously have to be global. Even then, it would result in the majority of the world’s population dying.

Just look how much world population has grown since the advent of Industry. All those people depend on technology and industry to survive. A non-technological world could not support such a big population.

But the alternative is to keep technology and accept all the evil that comes with it. No ideology is going to be able to fix it.

We want to have our cake and eat it too (i.e. have a technologically-advanced world without any of the moral degradation it brings), and it simply doesn’t work that way.

And no, none of the current political systems is compatible with Jesus’s teachings. Only a Medieval-style Christian monarchy would be compatible with His teachings.
 

Gremlin

Sparrow
I have a better idea:

1. Destroy industrialism and technology.

2. Destroy all ideologies (including ethno-nationalism and other right-wing ideologies) and replace them with Jesus.

I’m not sure #1 is possible, and even if it were possible, it would result in lots of death and destruction. But I don’t think there’s any alternative way.
Technology and industrialization are only evil in the hands of idiots and people without leadership ability. Man will continue to invent and discover because it's instinct.

Ethnonationalism isn't ideological, but natural, as are my other bullet points which completely contradict the idea of ideology. If anything considered conservative becomes ideological, it ceases to be conservative. The republican establishment, libertarianism and the tea party hijacked the philosophy of Conservatism and are all just different degrees of leftism.

Replacing all the nuances of culture with Jesus with the expectation of everyone getting along and advancing civilization is another form of equality. Christianity has also proven to be as susceptible to leftist take over as any other institution. You have the "God loves everyone equally" and open borders cognitive diarrhea of the left along with the forceful spread of muh democracy under one of many pretenses -"Jesus Saves!" of so-called conservatives. Civilization existed long before Christianity and will continue to exist if and when Christianity dies out. Christianity is not the primary driving force behind civilization.
 

Rob Banks

Pelican
Technology and industrialization are only evil in the hands of idiots and people without leadership ability. Man will continue to invent and discover because it's instinct.

Ethnonationalism isn't ideological, but natural, as are my other bullet points which completely contradict the idea of ideology. If anything considered conservative becomes ideological, it ceases to be conservative. The republican establishment, libertarianism and the tea party hijacked the philosophy of Conservatism and are all just different degrees of leftism.

Replacing all the nuances of culture with Jesus with the expectation of everyone getting along and advancing civilization is another form of equality. Christianity has also proven to be as susceptible to leftist take over as any other institution. You have the "God loves everyone equally" and open borders cognitive diarrhea of the left along with the forceful spread of muh democracy under one of many pretenses -"Jesus Saves!" of so-called conservatives. Civilization existed long before Christianity and will continue to exist if and when Christianity dies out. Christianity is not the primary driving force behind civilization.
It is impossible to have technology and industrialism without it getting into the hands of the “wrong” people. If the current elite were not in power, it would just be another group of people just as bad.

Oh, and the people currently in charge are not “idiots.” They know exactly what they’re doing and why.

You know the old saying “Don’t assume malevolence until you can rule out incompetence”? I think it’s actually the opposite. Don’t assume incompetence until you can rule out malevolence.

Ethno-nationalism is, in fact, an ideology. Just because it’s an ideology you support or agree with doesn’t make it any less of an ideology.

Every example you gave against Christianity is actually a distortion of Christianity for political reasons (e.g. open borders because “Jesus loves everyone”).

What makes you think Christianity will die out?

If it does die out or become totally corrupted and unrecognizable (as recent trends have shown), then it will be because of the very ideologies and technological systems you defend.
 

Gremlin

Sparrow
It is impossible to have technology and industrialism without it getting into the hands of the “wrong” people. If the current elite were not in power, it would just be another group of people just as bad.

Oh, and the people currently in charge are not “idiots.” They know exactly what they’re doing and why.

You know the old saying “Don’t assume malevolence until you can rule out incompetence”? I think it’s actually the opposite. Don’t assume incompetence until you can rule out malevolence.

Ethno-nationalism is, in fact, an ideology. Just because it’s an ideology you support or agree with doesn’t make it any less of an ideology.

Every example you gave against Christianity is actually a distortion of Christianity for political reasons (e.g. open borders because “Jesus loves everyone”).

What makes you think Christianity will die out?

If it does die out or become totally corrupted and unrecognizable (as recent trends have shown), then it will be because of the very ideologies and technological systems you defend.
Do you believe that there is no one on earth that has the leadership ability to subjugate technology to the interest of greater civilization? That's as absurd as the "absolute power corrupts absolutely" boomerism. It's true for 99.5% of humanity, but not the rare half of a percent. The wrong people always get power in prole-rule government like democracy. It rewards idiocy, sociopathy, lies, degeneracy and manipulation. Tyranny is the love of power hungry idiots.

What is ideology? It's people's projection of their fears, weaknesses and lust for power on to nature attempting to change or deny it. It's people trying to contort nature in their image. It's hubris.

Ethnonationalism is simply self-interest and drive towards self-determination broadened to a tribe, and has been the natural state of man for tens of thousands of years.

The distortions of Christianity, or the leftist takeover of Christianity as I call it, is my point. Everyone turning to Jesus will not save civilization because religion has been proven to fold up under political pressure. When the pope is a commie globalist, the Church has been infiltrated by the Gay Mafia and female leadership, the followers are rewarded for cucking to demographic change and LGBT, and few if any people care about its esotericism in the interest of exclusivity, then you know the religion is on its deathbed. I could say this about any religion.

I didn't say Christianity will die out. The keyword I used is IF. Some argue that it's just a shell of its former self. It's hard to argue with them, but it may gain its former glory if and only if America and Europe get over equality, pacifism, tolerance, exclusivity, diversity and individualism, and instead turn towards what made Ancient and Medieval Europeans great at their peaks, which has nothing to do with ideology.
 
Last edited:
Top