Conservatives Say It Out Loud: They Hate Democracy

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.truth-out.org/conservatives-say-it-out-loud-they-hate-democracy/1316786695

The roots of today's toxic conservative movement lie in Ayn Rand's teaching that wealthy "producers" -- now called "job creators" -- should be left alone by the government, namely the rest of us. The rest of us are "freeloaders," "moochers," "leeches" and "parasites" who feed off these producers and who shouldn't be allowed to make decisions to collect taxes from them or regulate them or interfere in most other ways. The Randians hate democracy, and say so, declaring that "collectivism" sacrifices individual rights to majority wishes.

For decades these selfish, childish, "you can't make me" beliefs stayed largely below the radar, because conservatives understood that voicing them in public risked alienating ... well, anyone with any sense at all. But for various reasons sense has departed the country and conservatives are finally saying it out loud, for everyone to hear: they hate democracy. They want to limit the country's decision-making and the rewards of our society and economy to those they feel "deserve" to be on top, namely the "producers" and "job-creators."

Writing in Registering the Poor to Vote is Un-American conservative columnist Matthew Vadum reflects these views, writing that democracy is "like handing out burglary tools to criminals." He writes,

It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country -- which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote.

More at the link --

[DCBob]

1. they only want democracy when the votes go their way.

Its shocking how these assholes dismiss the very core values of America and yet claim to be patriots and love the constitution. Sickening.

[Leopolds Ghost]

31. "We are a Republic, NOT a Democracy", as conservatives used to drum into kids. Remember that?

Before they started believing their own propaganda (from Reagan on back) that we were the sole beacon of freedom

(which used to be a LIBERAL idea until they turned it into a Cold War us-versus-them one.)

Also, Fareed Zakaria (one of the Washington Post, Time and Newsweek's chief correspondents) wrote a book on how democracy was LITERALLY obsolete thanks to modern technology and the rise of a global supranational overclass. He said liberty of capital was more important.

He seems to believe it too.

No wonder people don't read Newsweek any more thanks to what the Graham family (Washington Post) turned it into.

[DrunkenBoat]

48. got a link for that?

[Dawson Leery]

40. Everytime they lose an election, the right wing kooks come out

of the woodwork to protest and always threaten violence.

[Cool Logic]

2. Real liberals hate democracy too...

The American system is a Constitutional republic. A democracy, is a system of unlimited majority rule, i.e., mob rule dressed in a coat and tie.

For example, under a democracy, if the majority does not like what you say, they can legally sentence you to death.

[CarmanK]

3. That is why the AMERICAN DEMOCRACY IS UNIQUE As intended!

The founders designed a unique democracy for america. It declared first and foremost "that all are created equal" and that such a goal was something to strive for. It declared that the tyranny of the few shall not rule the many. It declared that people have a right to participate in the decisions that are made for the "COMMON GOOD". THAT all people have the right to a govt that is WE THE PEOPLE who must then share the responsibility for the destiny of the few and the many. And Thomas Jefferson reiterated the fact that EDUCATION of the population was a necessity to sustain a democracy. The US of AMERICA said that the UNION shall prevail. And taxation without representation is unfair. That is what spearheaded the revolution. DEMOCRACY in an educated society is hard work and sometimes cumbersome and inefficient, but it is a far better way for the general populous to gain its RIGHT TO LIFE, LIBERTY AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, than any other form of GOVT prior. Liberals love DEMOCRACY< all its, sloppy, exasperating, cumbersome, frustrating moments, because MOST OF ALL LIBERALS "LOVE PEOPLE", and are forever awed by the uniqueness of each individual. As I told my nephew the other day, who was lost as to his direction in life. Everyone in this time has a role to play in this life, and because of uniqueness only he has his talents, his view, his wonderment. It is up to him to find out how he is going to use that talent to make a good life for himself and for others.

[barbtries]

4. great post.

welcome to DU

[Cool Logic]

6. There is one significant problem with your assertion...

Article IV. Section 4.

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

American "Democracy" is un-Constitutional; thus, it does not exist.

[William Seger]

15. You've bought into a conservative talking point

The liberal theory of government begins with the assumptions that, as Jefferson put it, "all men are created equal" and that "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." The way that consent is granted is by the democratic process. The Constitution that created the Republic you're talking was itself adopted by the democratic process and it's subject to any conceivable revision by the democratic process.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Cool Logic]

20. Thomas Jefferson: A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where 51% of the people may take away

the rights of the other 49%.

Jefferson, as well as the other Founding Fathers were real liberals and they abhorred democracy.

John Adams: Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

James Madison: Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their death.

Benjamin Franklin: Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

John Witherspoon: Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state - it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.

John Adams: That the desires of the majority of the people are often for injustice and inhumanity against the minority, is demonstrated by every page of the history of the world.

John Marshall: Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist Papers: We are a Republican Government, Real liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of democracy...it has been observed that a pure democracy if it were practicable would be the most perfect government. Experience has proved that no position is more false than this. The ancient democracies in which the people themselves deliberated never possessed one good feature of government. Their very character was tyranny; their figure deformity.

[William Seger]

24. Fake Jefferson quote

http://www.cronaca.com/archives/003038.html

Real Jefferson quotes:

"The measures of the fair majority... ought always to be respected." --Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1792. ME 8:397

"I subscribe to the principle, that the will of the majority honestly expressed should give law." --Thomas Jefferson: The Anas, 1793. ME 1:332

Fake Franklin quote (see Misattributed): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin

I didn't check the others. Why are you posting fake quotes?

[William Seger]

26. Madison quote surgically altered

Your Madison quote leaves out the beginning of the sentence: "Hence it is that such democracies..." referring to majoritarianism systems described in the preceding paragraphs, e.g.:

A zeal for different opinions concerning religion, concerning government, and many other points, as well of speculation as of practice; an attachment to different leaders ambitiously contending for pre-eminence and power; or to persons of other descriptions whose fortunes have been interesting to the human passions, have, in turn, divided mankind into parties, inflamed them with mutual animosity, and rendered them much more disposed to vex and oppress each other than to co-operate for their common good.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Madison

He is simply arguing for a Constitution that protects the rights of minorities, not any hatred of democracy.

[Cool Logic]

27. "He is simply arguing for a Constitution that protects the rights of minorities,..."

Well, that is the crux of the matter; for minorities have no rights under a system of pure majority rule, i.e., democracy.

After further review, it does appear that the Jefferson and Franklin quotes are commonly misattributed to them. The only records from that era are the written word; thus, the only way one can be 100% certain of the verity of words attributed to men of that era, is their written words.

In any case, the quotes from Adams, Madison, Hamilton and Witherspoon do appear to be correctly attributed. The Hamilton quote is particularly telling. For he is adamant in his view that Real liberty is never found...in the extremes of democracy.

[William Seger]

29. "In any case" huh?

I've never heard anyone claim we have a "pure majority rule" democracy, but anyone who claims that we don't have a democracy is either sadly misinformed or parroting rightwing anti-democracy bullshit. In a democratic republic, democracy rulz, dude. Rightwingers are plutocrats, pretty much by definition, and plutocrats don't seem to be very popular on DU.

[Cool Logic]

30. It is those who make the mistake of assuming the US is a democracy who are misinformed.

As noted earlier, the individual is the tiniest of all minorities. A democracy's hierarchy of values emphasizes "group rights" over individual rights. Thus, minority rights are subordinated to the rights of the collective in a democracy.

You also make the mistake of trying to associate "anti-democracy bull$#!t" with the right wing, when in fact, it is the right that has traditionally suppressed minority rights. In fact, Jim Crow laws epitomize the essence of democracy.

[William Seger]

33. Bogus quotes, bogus definition...

... and bogus logic; strike three, yer out.

Repeating an earlier clue: The proof that we are a democracy is that the Constitution defines a democratic process by which the Constitution itself can be modified. By that process, we could completely redefine the Republic, or we could conceivably amend the Constitution such that any of the rights protected by the Bill of Rights were effectively nullified. I can think of plenty of arguments for why we shouldn't do that, but simply claiming "we aren't a democracy" certainly wouldn't prevent it.

[DrunkenBoat]

53. that is stinking tripe.

[DrunkenBoat]

52. as is the case still today, there were differences of opinion among the founders & signers.

which is the reason you have to resort to fake quotes to give some appearance of unanimity.

[Kingofalldems]

57. So where did you find these quotes?

Just asking so that I won't make the mistake of quoting from that site. Link?

[DrunkenBoat]

51. fake quotes, popular on right-wing websites.

[DrunkenBoat]

50. ?

A distinct set of definitions for the word republic evolved in the United States. In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. This is known as representative democracy. This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including in Noah Webster's dictionary of 1828. It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics.<54>

The term republic does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, but does appear in Article IV of the Constitution which "guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government." What exactly the writers of the constitution felt this should mean is uncertain. The Supreme Court, in Luther v. Borden (1849), declared that the definition of republic was a "political question" in which it would not intervene. In two later cases, it did establish a basic definition. In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the court ruled that the "equal rights of citizens" were inherent to the idea of republic.

However, the term republic is not synonymous with the republican form. The republican form is defined as one in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whom those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. <55>

Beyond these basic definitions the word republic has a number of other connotations. W. Paul Adams observes that republic is most often used in the United States as a synonym for state or government, but with more positive connotations than either of those terms.<56> Republicanism is often referred to as the founding ideology of the United States. Traditionally scholars believed this American republicanism was a derivation of the liberal ideologies of John Locke and others developed in Europe.

The political philosophy of republicanism initiated by Machiavelli was thought to have had little impact on the founders of the United States. In the 1960s and 1970s a revisionist school led by the likes of Bernard Bailyn began to argue that republicanism was just as or even more important than liberalism in the creation of the United States.<57> This issue is still much disputed and scholars like Kramnick completely reject this view.<58>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

[Kingofalldems]

56. Caught.

[Scuba]

10. +1 and welcome to DU

[Zorra]

14. Very nice. Welcome to DU, CarmanK.

:hi:

[louslobbs]

41. +1 and Welcome CarmanK

Lou

[ZombieHorde]

13. Constitutional republics are democracies.

Democracy is about rule of law and fair elections, not majority rule. If you wanted to make a case the US was not a democracy, you would probably have an easier time demonstrating the US going against the rule of law, than your current argument.

[Cool Logic]

21. Actually, you have your definitions reversed.

Democracy: a government of the masses. Authority derived thru mass meeting or any other form of direct expression. Results in Mobacracy. Attitude toward property is communist - negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion. prejudice and impulse without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demogogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy.

Republic: Authority is derived thru the election by the people of public officials best fitted to represent them. Attitude toward law is the administration of justice in accord with fixed principles and established evidence, with a strict regard to consequences. A greater number of citizens and extent of territory may be brought within its compass. Avoids the dangerous extreme of either tyranny or mobacracy. Results in statesmanship, liberty, reason, justice, contentment and progress. Is the standard form of government throughout the world.

[ZombieHorde]

22. Militia groups like that definition, but political scientists don't usually use that definiion.

Republics are a type of democracy, just like bagels are a type of bread.

[Cool Logic]

28. The word "democracy" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution...

On the other hand, the Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). Thus, no state could join the United States unless it was a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to "liberty and justice for all." Individual rights are the priority and since the smallest minority that exists is the individual, minority rights have precedence in a Republic.

Accordingly, the People have natural rights instead of civil rights; furthermore, the People are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. For example, one vote in a jury can stop the majority from depriving any one of the People of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy.

In a pure democracy 51% beats 49%. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority. In a democracy there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution's first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority.

Socrates was executed by a democracy. Even though he harmed no one, the majority found what he said to be intolerable.

[William Seger]

36. Why should it need to, when it's DEFINING our democracy?

I see you're also fond of rightwing word games. Democracy is built into virtually every governmental process defined in the Constitution.

[Cool Logic]

38. Well Sir, when the matter is of the legal nature, one must be specific...

Now, you may properly refer to the US as a Union, for it is legally identified as such. Likewise, we the People, are legally guaranteed a Republican form of government. And that, my friend, is what legally protects us from the tyranny of democracy.

[William Seger]

45. You still don't get it?

Nothing "legally protects us from the tyranny of democracy" because we are one. I've told you twice why that's so, and you've completely ignored it. Suit yourself.

[ZombieHorde]

37. Aristotle described three different types of government:

autocracy, such as monarchies; oligarchy, such as juntas; and democracy, such as republics. Ruled by one, ruled by few, and ruled by many. Within those three categories, there are lots of different possibilities. For example, the old Tibetan theocracy was a form of autocracy, as was the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein, as were the old British monarchs. Tibet's theocracy, Iraq's dictatorship, and Britain's monarchy were all autocracies, even though they all looked very different from each other.

Similarly, democracy in ancient Greece and democracy in modern US look very different from each other, but they are both democracies.

[Cool Logic]

39. Unfortunately, for Aristotle, Greece was not a Republic.

[ZombieHorde]

43. Are you adding to your argument: the US is not a democracy, or are you just throwing out

random distractions?

[Cool Logic]

55. It should be clear...in a democracy the majority has the power to kill anyone...

for any reason.

[ZombieHorde]

59. In some democracies that may be true, but not in all of them.

For example, if the majority of people in the US wanted to execute someone for not being Shinto, then we have to make some changes to our constitution, and change a lot of our laws around. By the time all of the policies were in place, that poor non-Shinto person may have died of old age.

Jokes aside, I am not sure what this has to do with your claim.

Are you still arguing the US is not a democracy? You have not properly addressed my rebuttal.

[DrunkenBoat]

54. .

[KG]

19. blah, blah, blah...

my ditto-head kin bring that shit up all the time. try something else. :eyes:

[devilgrrl]

25. +1

:thumbsup:

[Leopolds Ghost]

32. Of course, a Republic with only two parties is not very liberal at ALL.

As citizens of every other nation in the world can attest.

[fishwax]

35. no they don't

"democracy" need not always refer to direct/pure democracy (which is what the founding fathers generally mean when they criticize Democracy). The U.S. is a constitutional republic organized around representative democracy.

[MFrohike]

46. Not quite

The difference between a democracy and a republic lies in not understanding the words. Put simply, there is no difference. A republic is a form of democracy, not a distinct entity. You might as well argue that poodles and cocker spaniels are different species because they don't look the same.

Now, if you chose to use an example of an unlimited direct democracy, in which unlimited meant unlimited power (sort of how Parliament theoretically works) then you might have an argument about the "differences" between a democracy and a republic. Without the important qualifiers though, it's just a series of word games without understanding the words.

[DrunkenBoat]

49. in greek mob rule = ochlocracy. democracy isn't foremost unlimited majority rule, nor mob rule.

democracy is foremost rule by the demos, the people, and includes representative democracy, direct democracy, consensus democracy, etc.

Ochlocracy ("rule of the general populace") is democracy ("rule of the people") spoiled by demagoguery, "tyranny of the majority" and the rule of passion over reason, just like oligocracy ("rule of a few") is aristocracy ("rule of the best") spoiled by corruption.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy

we live in a theoretical republic & a theoretical democracy simultaneously.

[alphafemale]

5. Who is John Galt?

Someone who would make your ten-year-old work a 70 hour week.

For a whole ten dollars.

[duhneece]

7. Democratic republic

We're a republic because we have representatives who are supposed to represent us. If a party or the king chose the representatives, we wouldn't be a democratic republic, but because the people elect their own representatives, we're a DEMOCRATIC republic, with protection for the minority.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. NO, that is NOT the disctinction

Norway, Sweden, and Denmark are NOT republics, but Iceland and Finland ARE.

Ireland is a republic, but the U.K is not.

France is a republic, but Holland and Belgium are not.

South Korea and Taiwan are republics, but Japan is not.

Indonesia and Malaysia are republics, but Thailand is not.

Yet all of these countries are representative democracies.

What is the difference? Anyone?

[brutus smith]

8. Call it like it is

When are we as Democrats going to call it like it is about "job creators"? We, the consumer, are the real job creators. If we don't spend there are no jobs created. I hope the Democrats in charge take note of this and turn the table on the Repubs.

[bbgrunt]

9. "They (the Republicans)

are doing it on purpose. They are making the government dysfunctional on purpose. They are making people hate government on purpose. They are working to turn people against democracy and put themselves in power in its place."

k and r

[Scuba]

11. Bingo

[OHdem10]

12. They want to go back to the days when we were a pure Republic.

The State Legislature selected our Members of Congress.
No direct vote for our Members of Congress in Washington.

Aristocracy--The rich and Business Leaders know best
who should represent us in Congress. The unwashed the
uneducated are too ignorant to know what is good for
them.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

18. That's why they always repeate the "fact" that 1/2 of Americans "pay no taxes"

Some of them are actually saying that only people who pay federal income tax should have the right to vote.

[Rex]

23. The GOP wants something far closer to a dictatorship style govt

then democracy! The GOP are our modern day domestic terrorists.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

34. Nowadays

they have the media and can spread this kind of clap trap 24-7. Eventually to some, it doesn't sound so extreme and therein lies our problem............... :shrug:

[DaveJ]

42. They are sort of Aristocratic

I've been surprised that some folks in fact openly call themselves aristocrats, ie, "I come from a good Aristocratic family."

The notion that everyone else is mooching freeloader is nonsensical since the vast majority of Aristocrats come from wealth and/or business that was passed down in their family. They did not create any jobs, often their parents or grandparents did. Often these businesses fall apart by the 3rd or 4th generation.

[krispos42]

44. They are terrified that the masses might vote themselves largess from the public treasury

Of course, it's A-OK for the elite to vote themselves largess from the public treasury.

[DrunkenBoat]

47. nazi wanna-bes. remember how you used to wonder how the third reich could have come to be?

if it happened here, i think some of your neighbors would surprise you.

most people go along & keep their mouths shut. some gleefully come into their own.

[Kingofalldems]

58. Kick this one to the top