Thursday, March 16, 2017

Why Democracies Drift Left


A post on Amerika titled Why Civilizations Drift Left: Social Feelings gave a general critique of modern society before coming to its thesis, which is:
the default state of human beings is self-destruction
The prognosis may not help us much because it doesn't present a problem we can fix. If societies self-destruct and that is it, then there is nothing we can do about it. Instead, let's narrow the scope a bit, make the problem more tangible, and suggest solutions. We'll look at democracies in particular and why they inevitably drift left.

Generation 1

The first generation has a fresh new democracy. Democracies never spontaneously arise. They aren't like autocracies where a successful warlord may quickly find himself in charge of a large realm. Democracies are always planned, always thought out, and always the result of much negotiation. The American founders knew that ideal government implied a balancing of political forces. In particular, they were afraid of the mob tyranny that democracy might unleash and sought to balance their power with institutions such as the Senate (long since handed over to the mob).

The new democracy limits the people's input. In early America this was done by limiting franchisement to property-owning men. The policy was an attempt to limit political power to the more productive social strata, under the premise that productive people are generally more likely to make responsible, long-term decisions for society. Productivity is a proxy for what is really wanted: a sorting of people by their psychological and intellectual inclinations towards effective decision making. And such ultimately is the goal of every social hierarchy: to promote the most capable to the top. Society might best be sorted by their attributes according to r/K political theory, with r-selected on the left and K on the right. We might even propose the theory that social hierarchies are inherently designed to promote Ks to social dominance.

In the depicted arrangement, the vote is strictly confined to a small portion of the right. The party line (yellow line) then will fall pretty much at the halfway point of the rightmost section, as each side vies for political advantage. The left-side party, which is just slightly tinged blue, will eventually realize that the disenfranchised citizens to the left would vote in their favor. Thus they work towards expanding their voter base by shifting the voting threshold leftwards.

Generation 2

Voting restrictions have been shifted heavily to the left. The party line now sits roughly at the halfway point on the right side, at what was previously the far left. The left-side party continues to push for inclusion of more voters.

Generation 3

Eventually, the plans of the founders are completely undone and universal suffrage is achieved. It would seem that the gig would be up; the left-side party has no one left to enfranchise. Should we expect that the left party, long advantaged by manipulating voter rolls, will be able to transition to a party that wins on arguments & ideas, or will they find other ways to continue the process of expanding leftward voter enrollment?

Generation 4

The answer is clear in the context of the US. The Democratic party has always been able to increase its power by pushing to the left, but that strategy may be running out of gas. They now exhibit the following characteristics that are all indicative of a driving desire to expand voter rolls in a way that favors their side.
  1. A demand for unlimited immigration. Any restrictions put in by Trump are rejected by leftists judges. Any suggestion that we have anything short of open borders is screamed down as racist hate speech.
  2. Voter fraud. All voter id laws are screamed down as racist. The DNC itself organizes and funds voter fraud. Democratic strongholds in the cities often report voter turnouts near or even above 100%.
  3. Violence against right-side voters. The primal drive is to reduce the opposition voters through sheer intimidation.
  4. Enfranchisement of felons. They seek to enfranchise the last remaining adults deprived of the vote. They will attempt to enfranchise children if they can, just so long as it appears they will vote liberal.
  5. Opposition to remaining checks on mob power. They are currently infuriated by the electoral college. Luckily this one is specifically enshrined in the Constitution and requires an amendment to remove.


The next time we form a democracy, there will be many hard-learned lessons to apply. Foremost there must be a core of the constitution that is immutable and which includes voter franchisement restrictions. No Representation Without Taxation! will be the next rallying cry. Otherwise, the outcome will always be universal and equal suffrage, which causes the destruction of the society. (If that isn't certain now, it will be if we ever find ourselves in the situation of rebuilding society.)

No comments:

Post a Comment