This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Democracy And Its Contradictions

Tyler Durden's picture


The next in a continuing series (most recently: Evil and the State).

Submitted by Free Radical

Democracy and Its Contradictions

Democracy, as Churchill said, “is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time,” the assumption being that because the state is the only conceivable form of government (and therefore necessary for civil society to exist), the democratic state is the best state, even if it is merely the best among bad ones. This flies in the face, of course, of the godlike esteem in which democracy is held around the world, both by those who are ruled by such states and by those who yearn to be. Democracy, after all, is based on “the proposition that the legitimacy of all political power arises from, and only from, the consent of the governed, the peoplei  – the assumption being that the democratic state embodies this noble proposition. 

The problem, however, is that while the people’s consent in a democratic state is supposedly expressed through the right to vote – through the so-called “ballot” – consent has little if anything to do with the process:

Doubtless the most miserable of men, under the most oppressive government in the world, if allowed the ballot, would use it, if they could see any chance of thereby meliorating their condition.  But it would not, therefore, be a legitimate inference that the government itself, that crushes them, was one which they had voluntarily set up, or even consented to.

What does it mean, in other words, to vote within the confines of that which one had no vote in creating and when those confines, therefore, cannot legitimately – i.e., in a morally justifiable manner – rule over one? Even assuming that those confines are minimal (though none are, of course, even if they were so conceivedii), what moral authority or obligation can such confines have?  What authority or obligation, that is, can political constitutions have?

The answer, simply put, is none.  The United States Constitution, for example,

… has no authority or obligation at all, unless as a contract between man and man. And it does not so much as even purport to be a contract between persons now existing. It purports, at most, to be only a contract between persons living [long] ago. … Furthermore, we know, historically, that only a small portion even of the people then existing were consulted on the subject, or asked, or permitted to express either their consent or dissent in any formal manner. Those persons, if any, who did give their consent formally, are all dead now. … And the Constitution, so far as it was their contract, died with them.  They had no natural power or right to make it obligatory upon their children. It is not only plainly impossible, in the nature of things, that they could bind their posterity, but they did not even attempt to bind them. That is to say, the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves.


As taxation is made compulsory on all, whether they vote or not, a large proportion of those who vote, no doubt do so to prevent their own money being used against themselves; when, in fact, they would have gladly abstained from voting, if they could thereby have saved themselves from taxation alone, to say nothing of being saved from all the other usurpations and tyrannies of the government. To take a man's property without his consent, and then to infer his consent because he attempts, by voting, to prevent that property from being used to his injury, is a very insufficient proof of his consent to support the Constitution. It is, in fact, no proof at all.

Just as representative democracy is a farce, then, so is the constitutionalism that attends it. For what constitutions are based on is not self-determination but pre-determination, which, under the best of circumstances, merely provides the means by which such consent as is presumed to have been given can accordingly be withdrawn.

Even so, the nation founded on this supposedly unalienable right no longer recognizes it. For notwithstanding the fact that there is no actual law prohibiting self-determination – up to and including secession – the United States Government has made it clear that it will pursue secessionists to the point of genocide on the presumption that preserving the Union is paramount to all other concerns. A “Civil War” was fought over this very point, after all,iii at a cost of over 600,000 lives and an untold destruction of property, at the conclusion of which the selfsame government was forced to abandon its prosecution of the secessionists’ leader, realizing that to do so would be to expose the fallacy of its argument: “The federal government knew that it could not try [Confederate President Jefferson] Davis for treason without raising the constitutional issue of secession.” iv

Nonetheless, a century and a half later, the U.S. Government staunchly maintains its position (without having to openly defend it) and does so with full knowledge that its erstwhile adversary, the former Soviet Union, and its present one, China, each cited the Civil War as their authority for using force to keep their own governments intact:

Perhaps the most dangerous legacy of the war was the Northern claim that it could use force and go to war to prevent any state from withdrawing from the Union.  This has haunted us in the past decade and will continue to do so, as the Soviet Union’s Mikhail Gorbachev claimed the right to use force to hold his union together and cited Abraham Lincoln as good authority for doing so.  In 1999, the Chinese premier reminded President Clinton that he had the right to use force to hold China together, to go to war to reclaim Taiwan, and he too cited Abraham Lincoln as good authority. v

But such is the logic of the state that it seeks to perpetuate itself at any and all cost, and thus does the democratic state fall victim to its own hypocrisy. For any state that denies its people the right of self-determination is totalitarian, the more so in accordance with how far it will go to deny that right. And while 600,000 lives are but a small fraction of those lost in the lie that was the USSR, insofar as the USA fell victim to the lie of forced union, its atrocities differ only in degree, not in kind.

Moreover, insofar as forced union in America enabled the rampant statism that soon included the fraud of centralized, fractional-reserve banking, the death toll from decades of government-induced poverty might well be in the millions. After all, the Great Depression – which, contrary to the received truth, was both perpetrated and perpetuated by the U.S. Government’s own policies – caused the premature deaths of countless Americans, to say nothing of how many lives will be needlessly foreshortened and otherwise ruined by the time the present economic calamity – also a direct result of the U.S. Government’s own policies – finally exhausts itself.

To its credit, the government of Canada did not prevent one of its constituent provinces from holding a referendum on secession. And no matter that the referendum failed (except, that is, to the 49.42% who voted in favor of it), the fact that it was allowed at all is commendable. Ask any official of the United States Government whether its citizens have this right, however, and they will be at a loss for words,vi  knowing that to deny the right is to deny the nation’s founding principle, while to affirm it is to open the floodgates of the Government’s demise and thereby jeopardize the official’s sustenance through “the political means.” 

Many will argue, of course, that the contradictions of any particular democratic state are insufficient to deny the validity of the democratic ideal. And while the cynic might reply that just because the democratic state doesn’t work in practice doesn’t prove that it can’t work in theory, let us eschew cynicism and simply ask the question that Thoreau asked: “Is a democracy, such as we know it, the last possible improvement in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man?”

Of course it is, and it begins with the recognition that the right of self-determination is just that – a right of the self and thus of the individual, the real, present, and perpetual acknowledgement of which is the only constitution that has any moral authority or obligation.  For only then does “the consent of the governed” have any genuine meaning; only then can “the action of the organs of the state” be held in check; and only then can the stage be set for what would otherwise be impossible – “The Transition to a Free Society” – which we will address in my next submission.


i  Robert Nisbet, The Quest for Community: A Study in the Ethics of Order & Freedom, ICS Press, 1990 (Oxford University Press, 1953), p. 220.
ii  “It is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with power. ... Our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to which, and no further, our confidence may go. ... In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution." --Thomas Jefferson: Draft Kentucky Resolutions, 1798.
iii  There is no denying that slavery was an important issue, nor is there any defending the institution itself. Neither is there any denying, however, that the nation’s new president held slavery inviolate in the states where it was still practiced or that he was as racist as any other American of his time, Northern or Southern.
iv  Charles Adams, When In the Course of Human Events, Rowman & Littlefield, 2000, Chapter 12, “The Trial of the Century that Never Was,” p. 178.
v  Ibid., pp. 228 and 229.
vi  With one notable exception, of course.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 19:53 | 958379 Racer
Racer's picture

In the UK, the way the voting system is, the Labour party have to get very few of the votes to control, in comparison to a massive, massive need for a majority for the Liberal Party, so by default the Lib Dems will never get in full power even if a lot of the people vote for them... that is NOT democracy at all

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:42 | 958477 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

This is government capture of a democracy.   There are so many people entirely dependent on and beholden to government largesse, that this single block of people vote always for the (or one of the) "government party(/ies)," whatever they happen to call themselves.    In a parliamentary system, this yields a permanent majority for left of center and leftoide parties to such a degree that the moderate right ends up looking extreme.  

The conservatives aren't any such thing in most such places on the planet, and even the "extreme right" parties are actually just statist, socialist parties with a nationalistic or xenophobic flair.    Those fringe views exclude the moderate right from making coalitions with them, and it is probably just as well because the so called far right parties are also just big government parties.

This phenomenon is of course not limited to Europe.  California is already there.   It is run by the government for the government, so large and so coddled have become the mass of state employees and their objective allies the permanent welfare class.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:42 | 958600 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

Here's a citation, but most widely known, e.g."

"When Benjamin Franklin exited the Constitutional convention, he was asked by a woman, “Sir, what did you give us?” 

Franklin replied, “A Republic ma’am, if you can keep it.” 

Most Americans today are persuaded today that our American system is a Democracy and not a Republic. The difference between these two is essential in understanding Americanism and the American System." - Ned
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:19 | 958664 G-R-U-N-T
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:22 | 958668 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

us grunts gotta stick together ;-)

03? 11? or just another knuckledragger?


- Ned

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:30 | 958682 G-R-U-N-T
G-R-U-N-T's picture

Our own individual freedom is the proper limitation of government.

Those of us that have a true critical sense of what true freedom represents have always risen to the occasion and have understood either innately or through recovery from oppression exactly what Mr. Franklin means and what a republic represents.

'night ;-)


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:24 | 958755 NOTW777
NOTW777's picture

Many Americans would be surprised to learn the word “Democracy” does not appear in the Declaration of Independence or the U.S. Constitution. Nor does it appear in any of the Constitutions of the 50 states. The Founders did everything they could to keep us from having a democracy.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 05:33 | 959139 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Franklin replied, “A Republic ma’am, if you can keep it.” 


As if the priority of threat in the 18th century was socalled democracy.

What people want to believe...

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 13:29 | 960035 sunkeye
sunkeye's picture

t/y for this

im smarter for reading it

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:00 | 958633 Devout Republican
Devout Republican's picture

Should'a gone with Nixon's health care bill instead of this crazed leftist nobamacare.


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 04:17 | 959096 jeff montanye
jeff montanye's picture

obama's not a leftist.  he is a toady of the rich and the corporations.  he has extended the police state established/enhanced by george w bush.  he may be a muslim born in kenya (i doubt it) but he is not a progressive/liberal/socialist/marxist/leftist.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 12:10 | 959720 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

The distinction between liberal and conservative is simple: liberals want to expand the size and scope of government and conservatives do not.  The entirety of our congressional lot (and executives) are liberals... 

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:02 | 958639 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

mebbe californication iz run by pi-ratz and the goobermint stoolies are our slaves.  things got really baaad here after "they" re-called gov. jefferson "grey" davis, b/c of uhhhh,...enronesque fukaroni via pacific graft and extortion (PG&E). 

the permanen-toes rule. 

the goobermen-toes have gotz nothin' coming, except their own turds, baked into the pi.  and, they're even starting to figure that out, themselves!!!  we can now hear the sound of one sphinXtor clapping.  yours.  they are about to becum permanen-toes, 2, docha see, brainiac?  well, 80% of dum.

i don't have any idea where you live or whatcha do, sir, but i suspect ya mighta OD'd on the MSM abt 40 years ago, and heaven't bin rehabilatittied, yet, asswipe.  if ya ever get out for some fresh air and exXxercise, why doncha stop by the catholic church nearest the hispanic mark-ette nearest yer freaking gate-tred commuministry, ok?  notice any BEanerz?  wtf is going on w/ that shit?  anywho?

well, sir, an organization known for its subversive tendencies, and whose last name rimes w/"parodies" has been contolling immigration since, well, 1975 and the fall of sai-gon, sir.  Nothing more cosmic than a pissed-off nun, is there?  let's see what happened to jake and elwood, ok? YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

and, they seem to like mexicans, possibly b/c if anybody fuks one of their kids in those cute little but-toX, he will get his balls cut off, if he's lucky.  and, perhapz even a shitforbrained moron like you, sir, can understand that there just might B some polit-i-cal and relig-iou-s dimensionz involved here, aussiz.  maybe those generallissimo-toes (bishopz?  on the chessboard?) are gonna try to get them to kill chinese, someday, for j.c.  who knowz? 

you have heard the ONE about how can you tell when the chinese are moving into the neightborhood, haven't you, sir?

well, in case those MSM cunt puppetz you get yer "news" from haven't toldya the "punch" line, it goes like this:

how can you tell when the chinese are moving into the neighborhood, eh?

the mexicans start buying car insurance!


you have now bin rehabbed, sir.  welcome to the waking weak!YouTube - Elvis Costello -"..Working Week/...Go To Chelsea" Letterman

here'z yer re-hab cert, bro.  carry onzo!  got cash?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:59 | 958804 Jus7tme
Jus7tme's picture

I think TBT missed the point. The post (by Racer) he replied to was (indirectly) talking about the lack of proportional representation in Britain's and the US our congressional voting system.

TBT, your thesis that government employees vote themselves or their lackeys into power is also rubbish. The government is controlled by the financial elite (< 1% of the population). The only reason they let Obama win was to set up a scapegoat to blame for all the things that THEY (the elite) had engineered in the previous 8 years (or 30 years, but who's counting?).



Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:34 | 958939 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Oh, OK, so it isn't the outcome of elections, you know how people vote on election day, that determines who votes in our laws and appoints our judges.   It's some secretive illuminatiesque 1% shooting the electorate with eeevil mind rays. 

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:14 | 958638 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

The problem with a democracy is that individual voters are counted as equal among each other, no matter how knee-buckling retarded someone might be. The best way to remedy this problem is to give different voters different powers, just as some states are given different electoral weightings.  

For instance, your vote should be given an automatic deduction for any of the following:

  • You drive a Camaro with an bald eagle stenciled on the hood
  • You're a libertarian redneck who thinks America should return to its "Gunsmoke" roots. 
  • You have a mustache, and you think women are impressed by it 
  • You're completely obsessed with which "token" a country uses to denominate its currency, and you miss the fact that the plutocrats will always transfer your labor into their wealth using any "token" they want
  • You think that weather patterns in the Gulf of Mexico are caused by homosexuals in California
  • You think a machine gun is an appropriate defense against burglars
  • You high-five your wife when you hear, "Gentlemen, start your engines"
  • You think that an exchange of one US government debt instrument for another US government debt instrument affects cotton prices in Egypt
  • You think that increasing gross profit margins at the world's largest retailer and the world's largest fast-food restaurant is immaterial when discussing price inflation
  • You think the Gilded Age in American history is an example of how America experienced prosperity under the gold standard
  • You think the cruelty of survival-of-the-fittest that you see among animals in Nature should be applied to humans in civilized society
  • When your neighbor get cancer and looses everything, your reply is "tough fucking luck, but God works in mysterious ways and the world is too populated for this year's corn crops whatever..."
  • You think the Earth is 6,000 years old and fossils are tricks 
  • Your grocery store calls you when they run out of canned hams
  • You jizz in your pants every time silver is projected to hit $500/oz, especially when coupled with the idiotic catch-phrase, "price doesn't matter"
Etc. Etc. Etc...     So basically, if you believe in all points listed above, your vote would counted as a -15 for your candidate. Please note that I didn't even mention Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachmann or other conservative "super-retards" because, quite frankly, I didn't want to alienate everyone here.    


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:15 | 958659 nmewn
nmewn's picture

But's it's still a good thing that a ward of the state get's a full vote on what their next paycheck will be.


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:22 | 958669 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture


If your mother gets a medicare check, she shouldn't be allowed to vote - especially if she has a $250,000 liver transplant pending.  

Is that the "ward of the state" you're referring to?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:26 | 958678 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

another country heard from.  Good attempt to change the subject.

Welcome back RnR-let's play!

- Ned

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:44 | 958699 nmewn
nmewn's picture



So, according to the "progressive" mind, the "right" to vote is contingent on how much the state has invested in you?, "democratic" ;-)

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:43 | 958698 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

RnR: Here's something that you can buy (aligned with your pov) and skosh money: e.g.

In your system, well ... meet your better person.  Of course, he won't meet you, since you are beneath himself.


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:03 | 958727 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

My better person?   

By the way, here's a picture of me at a recent Republican fundraising event entitled, "Hurricanes and Avalanches:  God's wrath against Homosexuals and Scientists"


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 00:08 | 958821 vxpatel
vxpatel's picture

Naughty boy!



Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:12 | 958923 Bob
Bob's picture


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 02:55 | 959020 slewie the pi-rat
Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:50 | 959077 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

patel & bob:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:51 | 958709 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

If people only understood that Plato felt democracy was for the elite only, we wouldn't have this misunderstanding. Great list.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:59 | 958714 Astute Investor
Astute Investor's picture


You think that increasing gross profit margins at the world's largest retailer and the world's largest fast-food restaurant is really an illicit scheme by the respective management teams to defraud their customers by raising prices and claiming "inflation" as an excuse when none exists.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 04:10 | 959090 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

I already have all the canned ham I need buried in my backyard.

-15? You still vote?

I was the #14 junk. We're almost there. 

Democracy is a bitch. 

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 04:24 | 959099 Red Neck Repugnicant
Red Neck Repugnicant's picture

I already have all the canned ham I need buried in my backyard....

Based on some of your posts, I figured you probably have a few dozen hidden around the yard. 

When you invite your family over for Thanksgiving, is this your method:


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 04:47 | 959112 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

That was weak. Does the late hour waver your smarts?

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 08:15 | 959231 Azannoth
Azannoth's picture

Keep it simple stupid, onlya Net Taxpayer should be able to vote

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:03 | 958404 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

league 0' the iroquois, BiCHeZ.

longhouse4longhoserz.  brewery included, of course.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:54 | 958406 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


hoserz, quebec hoisted the maple leaf.  along w/QEII, eh?  at least on the do-re-mi...

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:44 | 958602 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

'ha ha ha, frite a l'huile, frite au beure et a l'ongnion!"

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:10 | 958412 zhandax
zhandax's picture

It should be pointed out that the founding fathers did not create a democracy in the US.  They created a Republic "if you can keep it".  We couldn't.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:42 | 958465 AnonymousAnarchist
AnonymousAnarchist's picture

Not just "we", no one could. Once the state is created (regardless of type), there is no mechanism to contain it. Sure, early on, when the virus hasn't had a chance to do much damage, it might seem better but the virus is still there. The point is, supporters of the state don't know they're infected (part of the intro to a stateless society).

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:11 | 958541 destiny
destiny's picture

I second this excellent comment...and thanks for the link.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:55 | 958623 Nikao7
Nikao7's picture

Hence there needing to be a revolution and abolishment of The Government every 25 years.  Jefferson,  I believe.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:50 | 958705 AnonymousAnarchist
AnonymousAnarchist's picture

The question then becomes, why give a group of people the authority to commit crimes in the first place?

Of course, this question is rhetorical. It's because too many people still believe a group of people with the authority to commit crimes is necessary for social order. If enough of these people ceased believing the myth (that the state is necessary or legitimate), there would no longer be any state to revolt against. That's why I put so much importance on attacking that myth. Because once one stops believing it, the fact that it's a myth becomes obvious (pdf).

Who says anarchy, says negation of government;

Who says negation of government, says affirmation of the people;

Who says affirmation of the people, says individual liberty;

Who says individual liberty, says sovereignty of each;

Who says sovereignty of each, says equality;

Who says equality, says solidarity or fraternity;

Who says fraternity, says social order;


Who says government, says negation of the people;

Who says negation of the people, says affirmation of political authority;

Who says affirmation of political authority, says individual dependency;

Who says individual dependency, says class supremacy;

Who says class supremacy, says inequality;

Who says inequality, says antagonism;

Who says antagonism, says civil war;

From which it follows that who says government, says civil war.


Anselme Bellegarrigue - Anarchist Manifesto, (1850)

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:40 | 958475 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Sadly, true.

Democracy is anti-individual not pro-individual. All it takes is 51% and the other 49% must bow to majority will. A perpetual state of misery & infighting for all.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:04 | 958525 zhandax
zhandax's picture

When the current state was created, we had just won a war and had time to contemplate what type of societal structure we wanted.  When the current state collapses we are unlikely to have that luxury.  Watch how things develop in Egypt.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:08 | 958646 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"When the current state was created, we had just won a war and had time to contemplate what type of societal structure we wanted."

Years of contemplation, by people who were a helluva lot more respectful of the people they served than our current crop.

It's completely upside down now.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:39 | 958690 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture


"Watch how things develop in Egypt."

Yep, been doing that and sparring a bit with GW, since he thinks that 3 weeks of "peaceful" protests by less than 1.5% of the population is sufficient for a) military coup, b) abrogation of their constitution, and c) getting rid of their legislature, and d) ... well, ... the next declaration has not yet eventuated.  But he's good with the process so far.

GW (and perhaps you, please let us know) thinks that the restructuring has to be ... faster ... faster.

I know others who wish to avoid wasting a 'good crisis' so 'this situation will never happen again.'

When the current state collapses (as you say) then I'd say to have it collapse into 1789 (as ammended).

but please let us know where you think things should collapse.  If they are sufficiently hot, then I have these whole large piles of snow that I'd like to dump, 'cuz they are interfering with traffic around here.

- Ned


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:36 | 958781 zhandax
zhandax's picture

OK, perhaps I left too much unsaid in that post.  It wasn't until a day or so ago when someone here pointed out the definition of anarchy as opposed to the popular conception of the term that I considered a 'stateless society'.  I doubt that anyone here believes that we can just go to the polls and vote ourselves some change in that direction.  It will require a collapse of the current state.  However, if and when that collapse occurs there will likely be no time to contemplate what type societal structure we want because of the immediate attempted power grabs which arise from the chaos and the necessity of fending off the most objectionable of them.

Personally I think the Republic served us pretty well but it was yet another casualty of the Civil War.


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 02:59 | 959023 slewie the pi-rat
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:02 | 958637 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

back in sorta' like sixth grade, I had this great teacher, now I'm recognizing Joan as a 'progressive'.

'No, the majority doesn't rule, all minority opinions must be considered'

'The Consitution is so old, we need to consider our current conditions'

'The UN needs to reconcile the interests of all states.'

I'll revere the lady to the last, but, well, I'm kinda' glad that counter-examples of above have entered into my view, so I can look at a decision.

- Ned

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:48 | 958612 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

you, sir, beat me to this truth.  But I have more faith that we 'can.'

near run thing, imho.  (But I've played with some of the amazing kids.)

- Ned

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:26 | 958761 NOTW777
NOTW777's picture

tell our president and MSM

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:11 | 958413 SwingForce
SwingForce's picture

I only read "Contradictions", and bullshitery at that. Try again.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:14 | 958420 Confuchius
Confuchius's picture



Picture your jumbo jet making it's approach to the airport in the mountains in fog & thunderstorms.

Every decision whether to descend faster or slower, whether to turn a bit right or left, is voted upon by the passengers.


Dumbocrazy. You asked for it. You got it.


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:15 | 958423 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

"what IS democracy?"

"I believe it's got something to do with young men killing each other."

"when its my turn will you want me to go?"

"for democracy, any man would give his only begotten son."

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 12:27 | 959790 RonnieHonduras
RonnieHonduras's picture

Democracy is the pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:17 | 958432 cunningtrader
cunningtrader's picture

It's supposedly simple:

In a democracy, politicians are elected by the people, to work for the people, as their elected spokesperson, in other words they are the peoples SERVANT.

The USFED/NYFED/illuminati/elites etc, have hijacked this very reasonable arrangement, and have

made the it work thusly: Total enslavement of all, through tax, manipulation and thus devaluation of the intrinsic value of the people's currency to zero (if all the GOV debt is counted).

" And GOD (The Elitists) looked at all and said, shit this looks very good ".


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:37 | 958591 kalum
kalum's picture

I've got to say this somewhere so may as well be here. Fcuk this Bernanke devil. He has made my life and the lives of millions of retirees poverty stricken, sent us to the food stamp lines with his misguided policies.


First step in reducing spending, my recommendation Disband the federal Dept of Education.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:05 | 958645 Devout Republican
Devout Republican's picture

First step in reducing spending, my recommendation Disband the federal Dept of Education.

Agreed! Also get rid of social security, Medicare, and food stamps!  Come on people use them bootstraps!

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:15 | 958739 nmewn
nmewn's picture


"First step in reducing spending, my recommendation Disband the federal Dept of Education."

Agreed...properly, it's function is at the state level. There is no reason for taxes to transit to DC, then back to the states, after the appropriate handling charges...driving the cost up.

And, as can be seen on this thread, they have failed to properly educate in very common civics lessons.

Dept. Of Energy is next.

It has failed in it's first mandate to make us energy independent.

Homeland Security is running neck & neck with DoE as it is completely redundant and is an outcropping of governments incompetence (on display) to even communicate with itself.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:45 | 958608 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture


"Every thing secret degenerates, even the administration of justice; nothing is safe that does not show how it can bear discussion and publicity...The danger is not that a particular class is unfit to govern. Every class is unfit to govern."

Lord Acton



Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:00 | 958712 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


snoodley, are you married?  b/c even a girl could see yer just ass-kin for a left hook, dearest.  my sweet lord is a real topper, esp where power and corruption eyre con-cerned.  absofuking-lute-lee. but, i'd bet my '33s AU walkin liberty to yer face that conan doyle coulda cuffed her and stuffed her in a NewYorkishHeartbeat.  whaddya think, toy boy, wanna play? 

got cash?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:59 | 958717 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

We have a representative democracy. It is far easier to buy a majority of representatives in each branch than it is to convince the entire population of your genius.

 Would you let whores run your business? Be your head of household? Apologies to actual whores- whom have much better morals than our politicians.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 10:17 | 959391 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

In a democracy, politicians are elected by the people, to work for the people, as their elected spokesperson, in other words they are the peoples SERVANT.

Yes, in a psycho/sociopathic sort of way:

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:22 | 958439 Treeplanter
Treeplanter's picture

Legally, the Confederate States were in the right.  But ending the institution of slavery trumped the legal issue.  Unfortunately it gave rise to big goverment, the de facto loss of the 10th Amendment and so on.  Yet the foundation of our great suceess is in that document.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:35 | 958469 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

And the 14th amendment was subverted and manipulated to give corporations status as persons.

Check the major court cases and most are regarding giving more power and autonomy to corporations.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:49 | 958614 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

If you want to see the real nail in the coffin visit 'Henry Ford vs Dodge Bros' Michigan Supreme Court ...

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:55 | 958627 Snidley Whipsnae
Snidley Whipsnae's picture

An interesting point to your comments; prior to and during the Civil War slaves were the biggest single asset class in America.

Imagine the deflationary impact of disallowing a complete asset class? It had a larger impact than would an announcement that all treasury issues were suddenly completely worthless, because slaves represented a larger asset class.

As an aside I would like to say that I am glad that the slaves were released from bondage. How slavery of anyone was allowed to develop and continue in what was basically a Christian Democracy is beyond me.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:16 | 958661 Devout Republican
Devout Republican's picture

The Bible endorses slavery.  So I say bring it back!

Can I get an Amen brothers?!

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:45 | 958792 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


sin'ce WE have al-red=dy sold OUR children in2 slavery, amends. why drink the cool-aide when cyan-ide is sooo much more efficient?

curious as to where the bible "endorphins" slatternly. tho?  j.c.?  paulus?  not saul, paul, ok?  just b/c the ethiopeeing eunice while arcing along, does that mean you should lose YOUR nutz?  ok, lemmy help you process yer own castration, ok, nutsac?

"jesus" was not concerned about the state, asswipe.  just the cyanist money kikes in the Temple of Justice, as it were.  ending slavery was a different octave.  the one we're on now, actually, Xeter Xegete.  "jesus"'s Work was primarily psychological, for sum reason.  but, they had to give it a FORM which would defend the truth from the decay functions of temporality, if you follow, my dear friend.  the form is NOT the essence.  the shell of the egg is neither the white, nor the yoke, which is EZ, b/c we can't bear too much, now, can we, beloved? 

gurdjieff:  i teach esoteric christianity.  and, that is ALL he taught, or claimed to teach.

peace, my biblical boba.   got cash?


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:02 | 958725 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

As an aside, I am amazed that slavery was continued and spread to all classes through Federal Reserve Debt Notes. We need to identify the top 1% for shooting practice.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:02 | 959024 slewie the pi-rat
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:45 | 958700 Bringin It
Bringin It's picture

Legally, the Confederate States were in the right.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:24 | 958443 AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

 DG White's complete treatise from which the above starts at page 22

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:27 | 958449 rational
rational's picture

"the instrument does not purport to be an agreement between any body but “the people” then existing; nor does it, either expressly or impliedly, assert any right, power, or disposition, on their part, to bind anybody but themselves."

Of course the Preamble to the Constitution says " secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America".   Notice that part about "posterity"?   Well, nice try anyway, I don't know what high school you go to but I hope you get a good grade on your essay.


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 00:58 | 958899 forexskin
forexskin's picture

a contract that encumbers posterity?

a defensible contract requires three things:




posterity cannot be presumed willing, and had no consideration when that contract was written, and performance? - yea, right.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:03 | 959026 slewie the pi-rat
Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:18 | 958902 forexskin
forexskin's picture


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:27 | 958451 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Much better argument in this part of the series and the reasoning asks the questions that we must all consider: what level of self determination provides the most liberty and an adequate level of security? How much law is enough? When does government stretch beyond our hopes and work to secure our despair?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:29 | 958455 dick cheneys ghost
dick cheneys ghost's picture

in america, the voting machine gets turned on once every 4 yrs and people somehow feel they have a say in how the country is governed. the banks and coporations get to vote everyday with wads of cash paid to whores who call themselves servants of the people.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:53 | 958618 SofaPapa
SofaPapa's picture

I like that: "the voting machine".  This is the piece few focus on.  Before we get to vote, our choices have already been limited and vetted through the "primary process".  Which is to say that we are shown the candidates that TPTB want in a good light in the media, and if any others have spent the effort actually to attempt to present a genuine alternative to the idiocy that currently passes for "representation", they are portrayed as dangerous or extreme.  Then they are ignored.  Of course, ZHers are used to this treatment, but it's always good for us to remember that to say we have a free choice among a genuine selection of the possible ways to run a "democracy" is false.  The bases of our future representatives have been selected out long before we ever get to the ballot box.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:30 | 958460 Sam Clemons
Sam Clemons's picture

Seems that we should be able to vote to replace the car instead of just changing the tires every few years. 

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:31 | 958461 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Erm, the government that governs least governs best, at least as measured in terms of maximizing self-determination of the individual and family unit.    It should protect property, life, liberty, and the pursuit of damn near whatever.   The U.S. government at all levels is occupying itself to regulate us into bureaucratic standards conformancy slavery.    Europe reached that point long ago, and their deathbed demographics show how the people reacted.   Their procreative response essentially says "What's the point."   They're on strike from what nature designed every organism to do.   It is astonishing, really.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:21 | 958556 Alienated Serf
Alienated Serf's picture

if the state has promised to care for your every need in old age, there is no need for children...

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:42 | 958950 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

As long as everyone else is having children.    Ooops!   

That's not happening in, oh, Germany for example.   Short of some technological miracles coming to bear, and I mean miracles, that country is in for a long slide.   China too.  One child policy and all of that.    Pensions will not be what were promised.  The tiny generations spawned to pay them will respond badly to the lack of incentive for their work.

Nice try though.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:06 | 959030 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


v. nice, bro!

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:39 | 958471 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

A "free society" is an illusory perception. It is infact an oxymoron.

A society will always be dictated by authority.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:42 | 958481 CPL
CPL's picture

What if the authority was machine dictated instead of human controlled?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:51 | 958497 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

I am having trouble understanding your question.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:18 | 958665 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Skynet has one major drawback.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 00:55 | 958892 single digit
single digit's picture

che' really?

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:41 | 958479 CPL
CPL's picture

I love the idea of democracy, I would love to see it used someday.  Until that point we'll have to put up with the bullshit until....ummm...we don't put up with it anymore.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:07 | 959032 slewie the pi-rat
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:47 | 958490 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

A free society is a society which is unorganized or loosely organized.  We had those once.  They were tribes.  Tribes are consumed from the inside, or from the outside, by forces which organize foolish men into massive blocs with empty promises of progress, more land, and more women.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:16 | 958552 destiny
destiny's picture

A free society is a society which is unorganized or loosely organized.  We had those once.  They were tribes.  Tribes are consumed from the inside, or from the outside, by forces which organize foolish men into massive blocs with empty promises of progress, more land, and more women.


Tribes were much better than the jungle we live in...and those who came to consume those tribes from the outside as a matter of fact, came from empty promise so called democraties....

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:10 | 959035 slewie the pi-rat
Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:00 | 958492 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

But such is the logic of the state that it seeks to perpetuate itself at any and all cost, and thus does the democratic state fall victim to its own hypocrisy. For any state that denies its people the right of self-determination is totalitarian, the more so in accordance with how far it will go to deny that right...

Shall we discuss hypocrisy for a moment? Shall we go down the list of tyrants the usa has imposed upon the people around the world? People in the usa complain that they don't have democracy or the right of self determination. Cry me a river ya losers! Pluck the imperialist beam from thine own eye before you complain about the moat[sic] around crapitol hill.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:41 | 958597 Cleve Meater
Cleve Meater's picture

Buzz, Not sure many @ ZH would disagree with you re the list of tyrants we've imposed on the rest of the world.  Thus, the hypocrisy charge doesn't really stick here.  Most here would concede I think, that our government is just as totalitarian as the totalitarians our government imposes on others.  It's just that unlike Egypt that kept the people pacified at the business end of a truncheon, we have McDonalds, Wal Mart, Welbutrin and Fox News to keep us zombified.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:27 | 958680 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

I think I know this bunch fairly well. We all whine like little bitchez that the desires of the few banksters outweigh the needs of our own financial positions but when it comes to acknowledging that we are the beneficiaries of a gorssly unfair world system we shrug it off. Does anyone here really want to see democracy in iran or saudi arabia or a level playing field as far as currencies go? A show of hands? We all complain about the destruction of the usa clownbux because we know that when it goes down we'll be eating plastic rice along with the rest of the world. I count myself in that statement as well. I cheer for the collapse but don't really relish the prospect in more honest moments.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:32 | 958769 Cleve Meater
Cleve Meater's picture

How exactly have we benefited (in any way that matters).  We're selfish, angst-ridden, suicidial, crime-ridden, obese, myopic, depressed and anti-social. Yeah, we benefited all right, in an illusory, synthetic financial sense, but at the expense of our collective soul... Karma's a real bitch like that.  Fuck up your yin and the universe has a way of slapping you with its yang.

Ultimately, I'm not sure we even disagree.  Collapse provides the catalyst for change, unpleasant as it may be.  Plastic rice will suck... But that's the pennance for the McMansion lifestyle.  The upshot: We regain our souls, and ultimately realize how utterly destructive  and pointless the age of debt-based gluttony turned out to be.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:12 | 959036 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


Both U guys & HP Drifter, 2

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???



Mon, 02/14/2011 - 04:23 | 959100 WaterWings
WaterWings's picture

when it comes to acknowledging that we are the beneficiaries of a gorssly unfair world system we shrug it off

Please exclude me from this thought process. But your other posts are usually so-weet!

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:56 | 958507 High Plains Drifter
High Plains Drifter's picture

We better admit to ourselves that unlike Cairo, Jerusalem is inherently violent and lethal. The situation is certainly volatile. The biggest challenge for today’s world leaders is to peacefully dismantle the Jewish State without letting it celebrate its deadly symptoms.....

Shlomo Sand, Professor of History at University of Tel Aviv and ardent supporter of Palestine, says that the Israeli government fears Arab Israelis more than they fear any other situation because they know it is ticking time bomb. We are told that Israel is a democratic state, but it is not. While on the one hand they encourage pluralistic thought in education, on the other hand they are of one mind on governing and that they think that Israel is a jewish state, for jews, never mind that millions of displaced persons also live there. It is as Atzmon has stated. We must fear the lunatics in Tel Aviv.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:09 | 958538 gwar5
gwar5's picture

But 83% of Arabs recently polled would prefer to live as Israeli citizens. It's peaceful, modern and convenient.

Palestinian poll: many prefer Israel - World - NZ Herald News

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:15 | 958550 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

I think many are expressing an opinion that a one state solution is best, with all palestinians in the greater state of whateveryounameit having the right to vote.  Palestinians have always been in favor of a one state solution with one person one vote.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:14 | 959039 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


troll& the sufi BElow:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:23 | 958562 nhsadika
nhsadika's picture America backed state, versus virtual prison camp with no economy...hmmm...

Why don't you read the article you link to

The results do not negate the authenticity of the Palestinians' desire for a state of their own, something that history has denied them until now. The polls suggest, however, that in real life jobs and political stability trump the fanfare of history


And why don't you state the correct statistics, I DONT see an 83% figure


*35 per cent of Arab residents of East Jerusalem would prefer becoming citizens of Israel.

*30 per cent would prefer to be citizens of a Palestinian state.


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:12 | 958922 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


are you married?  this is wonder-full!  if you put the google on "palos, root word of palestine", you will get 16,200 results, the first page of which is al-most entirely cyanide cool-aide, slewie would think, for some reason or udder, comme ca:The History of the Words Palestine And Palestinians

as someZsed when discussing the "breadheads":  let's get biblical!!!

this is a big subject, homey, but why fukaround, the hour is getting late, my friend.

Jesus chose to ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, which was a fulfillment of Messianic prophecy. "Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem! Behold, your King is coming to you; He is just and having salvation, lowly and riding on a donkey, a colt, the foal of a donkey." (Zech. 9:9).  "palm" "sundae"?

here we see the term "Zion", yet near totally-free of the usual, murderous connotations, ok? what's up widdat?  here's "jesus" in Mt. 12:34 (1,2,3,4?  in the "jewish" gospel?): "34 You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For the mouth speaks what the heart is full of."  hmmm...? i WONDER to whom he is referencing his ire? eh, you hozers?

let's try 2 Kings 5: 1-14, OK?  about a "dirty syrian":

2 Kings 5:1-14 (King James Version) 1Now Naaman, captain of the host of the king of Syria, was a great man with his master, and honourable, because by him the LORD had given deliverance unto Syria: he was also a mighty man in valour, but he was a leper.

 2And the Syrians had gone out by companies, and had brought away captive out of the land of Israel a little maid; and she waited on Naaman's wife.

 3And she said unto her mistress, Would God my lord were with the prophet that is in Samaria! for he would recover him of his leprosy.

 4And one went in, and told his lord, saying, Thus and thus said the maid that is of the land of Israel.

 5And the king of Syria said, Go to, go, and I will send a letter unto the king of Israel. And he departed, and took with him ten talents of silver, and six thousand pieces of gold, and ten changes of raiment.

 6And he brought the letter to the king of Israel, saying, Now when this letter is come unto thee, behold, I have therewith sent Naaman my servant to thee, that thou mayest recover him of his leprosy.

 7And it came to pass, when the king of Israel had read the letter, that he rent his clothes, and said, Am I God, to kill and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a man of his leprosy? wherefore consider, I pray you, and see how he seeketh a quarrel against me.

 8And it was so, when Elisha the man of God had heard that the king of Israel had rent his clothes, that he sent to the king, saying, Wherefore hast thou rent thy clothes? let him come now to me, and he shall know that there is a prophet in Israel.

 9So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha.

 10And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.

 11But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.

 12Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage.

 13And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean?

 14Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.


Luke 4

 1And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,

 2Being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered.

 3And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread.

 4And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

 5And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

 6And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.

 7If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.

 8And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.

 9And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:

 10For it is written, He shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee:

 11And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

 12And Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

 13And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he departed from him for a season.

 14And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about.

 15And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all.

 16And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read.

 17And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

 18The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

 19To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

 20And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him.

 21And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

 22And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

 23And he said unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself: whatsoever we have heard done in Capernaum, do also here in thy country.

 24And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.

 25But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land;

 26But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.

 27And many lepers were in Israel in the time of Eliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian.

 28And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these things, were filled with wrath,

 29And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was built, that they might cast him down headlong.

 30But he passing through the midst of them went his way,

and so on...

oh, btw, does anyone know what the root "palos" REALly means?


got cash?


slewie out.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:26 | 958569 destiny
destiny's picture

Well if you live in bombed ruins in Gaza wouldn't you hope for better commodities like the nive towns on the other side of the fence ?  it's like asking to chose between guantanomo and Miami.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:22 | 958558 destiny
destiny's picture

Yep and we live in growing sionist and totalitarian democracies....

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:57 | 958510 AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture
Japan's GDP Contracts, Surpassed by China in 2010

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:31 | 958579 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

But the news is already spun as bte.

So stocks go up. Same Ol shit. Uk had a surprise drop in GDP, stocks got to two year highs. Same Ol shit.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:22 | 959043 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


fukU and the whore you rode in from!

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 20:59 | 958515 Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture



Mob knows best.



After all it's the mob that keeps us in check by nipping at us whenever we express an opinion that isn't force fed from one of the threetards (CNN, FOX, CBS, etc).



Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:24 | 959045 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


you, gwar, mne:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:00 | 958518 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Ben Franklin explaining struggles for American democracy to a Frenchman:

"It's not unlike going to a French brothel, whereupon it'll be 50 to 100 francs for a lady of the line. And, when you've decided your pleasure it's always 100 francs. Naturally, it's because you always pick the best one don't you?"

Mick Jagger: "You don't always get what you want, but you get what you need!"

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:23 | 958672 nmewn
nmewn's picture

LOL...Franklin knew his democracy & it's price ;-)

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:05 | 958528 MonsterBox
MonsterBox's picture

not everyone should be allowed to vote.

only the educated and land owners.  that's how we started out in the late 1700's.  we've been creeping towards mob rule ever since.

otherwise, joe sixpack will vote the treasury into his pocket (politicians will buy the uneducated / unfrancised vote)

think about it.  do you want the lazy dumb asses voicing their opinions into law?!?


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:12 | 958543 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

Alexander Hamilton(?) noted that if we give the right to vote to people who don't own property then they will merely vote to take property away from those who own it. 

I would make it a little less harsh and say that anyone who pays a net positive amount on federal income taxes minus credits and federal subsidies should be allowed to vote.  That would give us about fifty percent of the population allowed to vote, maybe a little more. 

Blue hairs on social security and medicare should not be allowed to vote in federal elections because they merely vote to impoverish future generations so they don't have to sacrifice anything in terms of social security and medicare.  People on welfare, disability, unemployment insurance, etc, likewise should not be allowed to vote.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 09:27 | 959311 johnQpublic
johnQpublic's picture

 the rights of a full Citizen (to vote, and hold public office) must be earned through some form of volunteer Federal service. Those residents who have not exercised their right to perform this Federal Service retain the other rights generally associated with a modern democracy (free speech, assembly, etc.), but they cannot vote or hold public office. This structure arose ad hoc after the collapse of the 20th century Western democracies, brought on by both social failures at home (and by extension, the poor handling of juvenile delinquency) and military defeat by the Chinese Hegemony overseas.[13]


from starship troopers via wiki....

you wanna be a citizen....?

go fight the arachnids

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:22 | 958545 bob_dabolina
bob_dabolina's picture

I agree.

If you don't pay taxes you shouldn't be able to vote. This should give you incentive to be productive instead of having the capability to vote yourself gifts from the public Treasury in perpetuity. Voting is a privilege, and a privilege that carries responsibility. If you are unemployed and dont pay taxes you shouldn't be able to vote yourself gifts with my money.


If you are on your parents health insurance plan 'till age 26 then 26 should be the voting age.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:25 | 959048 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


solly, chollie, we lick tuna that tastes GOOD!!!

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 10:27 | 959409 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

instead of having the capability to vote yourself gifts from the public Treasury in perpetuity. Voting is a privilege, and a privilege that carries responsibility. If you are unemployed and dont pay taxes you shouldn't be able to vote yourself gifts with my money.


Where? in the US?

In the US, elections can occur with a 50  pc turn rate, meaning one elector do not vote. Generally, exclusion overlaps with disinfranchisement. People voting themselves stuff with your money... Actually, voters are more likely to vote themselves benefits with non voters money than the reverse.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:25 | 958565 gwar5
gwar5's picture

Yep, you're right. A lot of people mistakenly believe it was to keep slaves from voting, not so. Men were also considered the property owners of the families, so they were also the voter of the family as well, not the women. 

Socialism is an unholy alliance with the banks:

"The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves.

This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."

--Alan Greenspan, 1966. Gold and Economic Freedom.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:16 | 958553 Zero Govt
Zero Govt's picture

Free Radical

Excellent article and bang on the button. 

There is only one state of being, the individual. We make all decisions that suit us to join with a partner, to leave a partner, to join a herd/pack (company or bunch of football supporters) and to leave same. Self-determination.

What the Founding Fathers did was take the European/Greek idea of "democracy" and Govt and force it through a murderous civil war onto a country, surely a tragedy to begin such a 'Union'. But Americans had left (escaped) the suffocating tyranny of European Govt and Royalty. Why the fuk did these 'free men' want to replicate the same fuking dumb European structures of establishment oppression that they had themselves fled?

Or was it these same men who wanted to replicate the lazy, live off societies backs 'success' as Europes' parasites?

Nobody should be forced to do anything, give their earnings by threat of fine or loss of liberty. Once any non-consent is breached "democracy" is over. And once you realise this you realise having a single organ to represent us all is utter rubbish. 

There is only one solution. Freedom. Freedom gives everyone the choice to live according to their views but also having to interact with others of differing opinions. That is how society really works while Govt always restricts that dynamic for some one-size-fits-all nonsense about representing the majority and forcing it on everybody (shades of oppression).

Govt doesn't work because it cannot work. It's a central system when society is a diverse and varied structure and ever changing to boot. Govt is such fuking nonsense on every level you have to question the sanity of anyone that votes for what are paid crones of vested interests who need to be to have the funds to run for office. Corruption is baked-in right from the start, how's that for systemic flaws?

Just as Americans once escaped the oppressive establishments of Europe it is getting to the stage Americans may need to escape from this utterly corrupt, totally insolvent and increasingly oppressive Washington State of parasites. Or maybe it's time to have that civil war again, a re-run, where the individual wins and neither State or States survive and America lives up to its billing as the 'land of the free' (ditto Europe).

Undo the basic patently obvious mistake of Greek philosophers, European academics and American founding fathers.  The mistake anyone could represent us better than having the freedom to represent ourselves

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:44 | 958605 superflyguy
superflyguy's picture

One of the main problems is people nowadays don't understand the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy. And that is a building block of all problems, at least in the US. The progressive schools have done the superb job.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:27 | 958679 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"The progressive schools have done the superb job."

Yes they have.

Now all they have to do is live with what they created ;-)

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:29 | 959050 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


AND to the simple ONE below:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Mon, 02/14/2011 - 05:51 | 959147 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

But Americans had left (escaped) the suffocating tyranny of European Govt and Royalty.


That is a good fairy tale but far from reality.


Europe was entering the stage of waste economy on large scale.

Waste economy produces waste as its name points out. Waste of all kind: material or human.

Quickly, in Europe, there was that too much of people no longer needed, no longer useful in any way that was poured on the rest of the world.

The US was one location among many others. Check the data, at start of the 20th century, the world population recorded its highest pc of immigrants.

The US came with so much entitlements in order to attract migrants like government handouts of Indian lands on the mere ground of being a US citizen or requesting US citizenship, it was a success.

Yet the major engine behind the migration waves was the waste economy and that too much of people who had no more utility in Europe.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:26 | 958572 Implicit simplicit
Implicit simplicit's picture

Most people simply do not want to upset the apple cart. Most goverment workers, banksters, police, fire, teachers, military industrialists etc...basically want things to stay pretty much the same.

 Many people, including me, on this sight are considered radicals and/or anarchists by others.

The majority masses do not see the bleak picture that is inevitable for anyone willing to read and analyze the situation.

I think the most that can be asked is to be mentally and physically be prepared, if possible, for the shock that will come to the masses.

Hate to sound pessimistic, but I think real change will take decades, and only when it must, or it is too late.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:19 | 958744 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

It's already too late.  The majority feast off the production of the minority.  They have little reason, and even less fortitude, to make the sacrifices necessary to turn this around.  We are a plane on a runway which has passed the point of no return.  Now we wait for the crash.  I agree it could take decades.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:32 | 959053 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


howzaBOUT tomorrow???

to you & Nancy, both:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:29 | 958573 Yancey Ward
Yancey Ward's picture

Democracy's fatal flaw are the people themselves.  There are no good, non-violent constrictions on what a majority can vote for, no matter how tyrannical those choices might become.  The people who wrote the US Constitution were well aware of these limitations, and they did as well as they could by placing supermajority requirements to change the governing structures at the federal level, but nothing they did could really do more than forestall for a brief time the corruption of the people the document was meant to govern.  Ultimately, a minority can only assert its negative rights with violence in the face of a majority looking to abrogate them at the ballot box.  If you aren't willing to do that, then you must accede to the majority's will.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 21:29 | 958576 props2009
props2009's picture

This is hot stuff:

US outsources another $5bn to India

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:16 | 958660 Waterfallsparkles
Waterfallsparkles's picture

There used to be a poll tax.  If you owned property you could vote if you did not own property you had to pay a poll tax.  This was established so that the people that did not pay taxes could not vote entitlements for themselves at the expense of the people that did pay taxes.  When they got rid of the poll tax the people that wanted to enrich themselves from others voted to give themselves benifits at the expense of those who pay taxes.

I guess it is too late to establish a poll tax again.  Democrats would hate it.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:23 | 958673 VyseLegendaire
VyseLegendaire's picture

So you're an anarchist?  That was a really long winded way of getting there. 

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:34 | 959056 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


to you & sparles, both:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:40 | 958685 onealpha
onealpha's picture

We are supposed to be a Republic.  This should be required reading by every American.

Back to the republic; the golden mean: the standard form of government by Harry F. Atwood c1918

"The terms ''republic** and "democracy" are thoughtlessly and inaccurately used almost synonomously in dictionaries, in encyclopedias and in political literature and discussion. This country is frequently spoken of as a democracy, and yet the men who established our government made a very marked distinction between a republic and a democracy, gave very clear definitions of each term, and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had founded a republic.

Surely no one has more valid authority to use governmental terms, or to make definitions of those terms, than the men who evolved the best form of government the world has ever known. The statements of Hamilton and Madison, who were designated as the spokesmen and interpreters of the work of the Constitutional Convention, make it absolutely clear that the foundersof the republic had in mind a very marked distinction between these two forms."


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:09 | 958694 Dr. Acula
Dr. Acula's picture

This article is anti-American and shockingly offensive. Why do you hate our freedoms?

I for one enjoy paying taxes and handing over 25% of my income every two weeks. It is a small price to pay for the privilege of being American and being safe. Someday, if someone actually tried to mug me on the street, I know I can count on my government to protect me. Not to mention I am also protected against invasions by Afghani goatherders and Mexican agricultural workers intent on destroying our country.

How could I get a paycheck if the TBTF banks, Goldman Sachs, and the rest of our critical financial infrastructure weren't propped up with my tax dollars?

Without a democracy, how would I protect myself against dangerous cannibis plants and the plant-growing criminals who sell them?

Imagine how fast the economy would collapse if it weren't continuously speeded to equillibrium by the calculated interventions of the Fed! It is only a top-notch econometric theorist who is capable of solving the multivariate differential equations involving ordinal values. How else can one properly fix the price of loanable funds? It is a testament to the wisdom of the public and of the idea of democracy that this needed institution endures.

And imagine what would happen to the unemployment rate if all the crucial government employees lost their jobs! Where would people go to get their foodstamps then?

Without the tax-funded Department of Justice and the British Accredited Registry, how could people defend themselves against anti-trust crimes and criminal cartels - i.e. those who offer their products and services at unfairly high prices?

The arguments against democracy here are scurrilous. Democracy is clearly a prerequisite to freedom. And, if someone chafes under the yoke of democracy, they are always free to vote to disband it. If that's not enough, then they should get out of my country and go live on their own property somewhere else where their individuality isn't so valued.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 22:51 | 958707 ImNotExposed
ImNotExposed's picture

Canada is a pretty dim candle to shed light on the faults of the U.S. Also, equating "self-determination" with individualism is merely sloppy thinking. Self-determination is more accurately mutual determination to effect social choice towards the greatest good for the greatest number.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:02 | 958726 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

Lots of references above to the difference between a republic (good) and a democracy (bad) but no definitions.  Would like to hear one, along with a distinction that makes any difference.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:19 | 958749 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

A republic protects the minority interests from majority tyranny through basic rights codified by law. It shares power through checks and balances in different aspects of government that include: democracy, monarchy,  state representative democracy (the Senate before Wilson) and dictatorship (supreme court). All aspects designed to confuse and befuddle the braying of the herd except in those lucid moments when many groups can come together and see the benefit of government action. 

Unfortunately, it has failed. 

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 02:19 | 958995 onealpha
onealpha's picture

I posted a link to an entire book on the subject just a few posts above this.  Read it. Sorry, no pictures.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 06:15 | 959156 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Lots of references above to the difference between a republic (good) and a democracy (bad) but no definitions.  Would like to hear one, along with a distinction that makes any difference.


Alas, what definitions are you requesting? The whole 'debate' is typical of modern times, that is baseless, groundless, existing simply to fill a vaccuum, to make noise because silence would hurt too much.

A republic is a form of governm. Democracy is a political ideology. There is no compulsory opposition nor compulsory association  between the two.

Comparing, opposing the two is worth less than comparing oranges to apples which are both fruits.

Republic is a contraction of Res Publica, a roman conception of government that implies that ruling charges have to be public. In a republic, ruling charges are public, meaning they can not be bought, sold or inherited.

In the roman world, Res Publica had a polar opposite, that is Res Privata, that is the type of government ruling charges are inherited, bought or sold.

It is the type of government Monarchies have naturally used to. In a royalty, you are born a King and the ruling charge of tax collections can be bought or sold, or inherited.

Democracy is a political ideology, that is to be compared to ploutocracy, autocracy, theocracy, pornocracy,  kleptocracy and others which are all political ideologies trying to solve the question of power, that is why one member of a society should accept the authority of another member.

In democracy, for example, the cause is that people consent to be governed.

The whole 'debate' between democracy and republic is just another bubble of nothing, so typical of that US led world. Smokes and mirrors to avoid speaking of real issues.

It is all about a fabled past, a golden age where everything was honey and donkey milk, to an age of decadence. Troubles in the US are because the US devolved from the godlike Republic to the filthy democracy.

Nothing that makes sense actually, only tales. But tales that allow avoiding looking in the mirror.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 07:18 | 959192 Dick Buttkiss
Dick Buttkiss's picture

The whole 'debate' between democracy and republic is just another bubble of nothing, so typical of that US led world. Smokes and mirrors to avoid speaking of real issues.

My point exactly.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 10:32 | 959420 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

I forgot something quite funny actually.

When people try to sell democracy as mob rule, they actually think of ochlocracy.

Yep, people in the past were not as dumb as people, especially US citizens, like to think.

They distinguished democracy from ochlocracy. They covered the topic and this 2000 years ago. Always an evidence of good uses of resources when propagandist keep hammering a debunked point 2000 years ago.

The failure of propagandists in renewing their propaganda is our times' disaster.

Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:10 | 958734 seenod2010
seenod2010's picture

"Democracy and Its Contradictions"

1). Based on this article, am I under the wrong impression that we're discussing the Indirect Democracy? Even so, I am rather confused as to the use of the Gorbachev (Transformational Marxist) who via the Club of Rome made it clear Democracy is dysfunctional and China.
A). We really can't be evaluating Direct Democracies as none were used in the article's evaluation of contradictions.
B). In terms of Indirect Democracies, only the US had been used.

"After all, the Great Depression – which, contrary to the received truth, was both perpetrated and perpetuated by the U.S. Government’s own policies – caused the premature deaths of countless Americans, to say nothing of how many lives will be needlessly foreshortened and otherwise ruined by the time the present economic calamity – also a direct result of the U.S. Government’s own policies – finally exhausts itself."

"it begins with the recognition that the right of self-determination is just that – a right of the self and thus of the individual, the real, present, and perpetual acknowledgement of which is the only constitution that has any moral authority or obligation"

1). In my opinion, if you look at the "[Constitution] is a living document", you'd see this phrase along with 'outdated' and 'just a piece of paper'; the point the Federal government particularly at the Federal level sees the Constitutional restraints as principle obstacles to being able to:
A). Seek to fulfill their visions of the future.
B). Convince people (which isn't hard rub some emotion here, rub some ego there, mix in some good ol' ideological goodness for support, and you got the tyranny of the majority, aka sheeple, to follow you) that the Executive Branch determines the majority of domestic/Foriegn issues; despite, there's overlaps here.

Self-Determination V Federal Determination of the masses.

Basically, Community V Collectivism?

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:37 | 959060 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture


to U and EVERBODY on up to the last place UC this:

YouTube - James Brown- blues brothers

got CASH???


Sun, 02/13/2011 - 23:28 | 958760 Hacksaw
Hacksaw's picture

What a bunch of boobs. There is no wonder we are doomed. I've never seen such a crock of irrelevant nonsense.

Who votes or how they vote is meaningless. Do you yeniuses really think who has the vote makes any difference. The two party system invalidates the vote and the ruling elite are experts when it comes to ruling by crises. Calif. is a prime example of what comes from not looking past your nose. Knee jerk decisions based on what happens in the next 30 seconds instead of looking down the road. Before you know it's 24/7 trying to remediate all the unintended consequences. Grow up and stop falling for all the dividing propaganda.

Oh, my fav is the guy who says you shouldn't get to vote unless you pay taxes. That would leave all the rich guys out. You all are hopeless, I think I'll just sit back and wait for the collapse to sort things out.

This should throw another wrench into your belief system cog.

The four firms - PricewaterhouseCoopers, KPMG, Deloitte and Ernst & Young - have 81 offices in offshore tax havens, according to new research by Financial Mail. MP Chuka Ummuna, who earlier this month confronted Barclays chief executive Bob Diamond over the banks' 300 offshore subsidiaries, said: 'There's a whole industry out there dedicated to helping people avoid tax that will increasingly come under the microscope.

'The more people find out about large companies and rich individuals failing to meet their obligation to society in these austere times the more they will demand action.'

John Christensen, director of the Tax Justice Network, said: 'The Big Four are deeply embedded in the tax haven world. They're major players in shaping the laws and regulations of these places and encouraging clients - high net worth individuals and corporate clients - to maximise their tax avoidance through such places. 'The fees they can make from such work is astronomical compared to more boring accounting and audit work.'

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 00:25 | 958852 Harlequin001
Harlequin001's picture

Let me try and put this into context. If I invest 1 million dollars or pounds into a business I have a vote. If I make two employees redundant I am outvoted.

Democracy is nothing more than the ability of the masses to vote themselves ever greater welfare at my expense, which they have done with immeasurable success (and cost) to date. No wonder we're all bust...

It is the system of democracy that will die with this financial crisis and good riddance is all I can say. At least then hopefully a system will develop which enables me to plan and pay for the future of myself and family before I am too old to do so. We don't need or want welfare, we will pay for the things we need ourselves.

It doesn't work. At least, under a monarchy or autocracy there is some incentive for the head of state to hand over something to a successor, which required at least some semblance of competitiveness and durability in financial systems. Now we have no plan which looks further than what we can give ourselves within 4 or 5 years run by idiots clammoring to give the most away to the majority without any means to repay.

Every ship must have its captain.

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 03:39 | 959065 slewie the pi-rat
slewie the pi-rat's picture

eat shit,

lay eggs,

and DIE YOUNG!!!

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 08:00 | 959218 Harlequin001
Harlequin001's picture

Sounds like a devious if not overly cunning plan!

Sadly I have a problem with the egg bit, though clearly there are more than a few willing hands trying valiantly to aid me with part three.

If only we could keep governments occupied with these CAPTCHA's.

One can only hope that no one's keeping score...

Mon, 02/14/2011 - 01:35 | 958861 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

I've read down through all the comments and haven't seen anyone hit the core issue.

The Founders gave us a republic based on certain PRINCIPLES.  The republic form of government isn't what made it work. It's those PRINCIPLES that made it work.  Those same principles, if followed by all, would work in a democratic form of government.

The entire problem stems from ABANDONING those principles, by people in government AND people at large. 

Which of the Founders said our form of government works ONLY in a MORAL society?  "Moral" essentially means respecting others equally as much as respecting the self. It will NOT work in an immoral society where people don't respect others, and that's what we're seeing, it's no longer working.

When respect for other people dies out, society begins self-destructing, REGARDLESS of what type government is in place.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!