To the idiot children screaming and tantruming because they want democracy. No, you can’t have democracy. “Democracy” for any group larger than a family (and even in those, you might want to research the concept of designated scapegoat present in abusive families!) is an evil system.
A purely democratic system is simply rule by the majority, something that our founding fathers went a long way to avoid and the reason why our Republic has been stable and prosperous enough that you can afford to be a totally ignorant dumbass and not starve in a corner.
“But democracy” you’ll say, remembering this from something your equally dumbass college professors said “is simply government by the people. And the only reason the founding fathers didn’t like it is that they were well to do, privileged white men, and racist, sexist, homophobic.”
Yes, I know you heard all that in high school and college. Which is why the cost of your “education” should be refunded in its entirety and if they can’t give you (or the taxpayers) the money back all your professors should be thrown into debtors prison. Except that likely, they’d have to get back the cost of their education, and eventually we’re going to find the bastards who dumbed down the teaching of civics and history and started corroding the republic are dead, the cowards.
At this point the reason you idiot children — some of which are older than I — are running around with your hair on fire dreaming up “intra-state popular vote compacts” and screaming at everyone on the internet that you want your “democracy” is a perfect storm of stupidity, indoctrination and refusal to think.
Yeah, the founding fathers were imperfect men. There are no perfect men. Or women. Or beings who self identify as an ornate building and a yellow wingless dragon at the same time. To be alive is to be imperfect, to have imperfect knowledge and make imperfect decisions.
Yes, I know I’m committing the ultimate sin of telling you over-educated morons that you’re not perfect. Too bad, so sad. Most of you could pose for the dictionary definition of Dunning Kruger. You’re so provincial and mal-informed that you don’t even know how provincial and mal-informed you are.
Yes, democracy was rule by the people in Ancient Greece. But “the people” had some rather narrow definitions, that didn’t hinge on “lives here” or even “was born here” and “is breathing.” For most of the ancient communities, “the people” meant a few of the “right people.” Mostly, honestly, people meant the tribe, the center of the city state, the “good families” or whatever. And even giving the vote to those only, and considering that most of these communities were very, very small, democracies tended to be highly unstable.
Well, because in practicality, democracy means “government of the majority.” And if you think about it for a second, a gang rape is a democracy. Who cares if the victim doesn’t like it? There are multiple rapists, and they each get a vote. Or as someone more eloquent than I put it, a democracy is a sheep and two wolves discussing what to have for dinner.
“But that’s silly!” you say. “Those are crimes.”
And? They’re crimes here, partly because of our Constitution — that “outdated” document you’d like to supersede — and partly because it’s the law of the land. They’re not necessarily crimes or not the way we view them elsewhere. Note that in Islamic countries, a gang rape is the woman’s fault, or at least she’s the one who’ll get executed for it. And in many of the socialist/communist/progressive lands of the world, taking everything someone owns is considered virtuous, not a crime. Curiously, these places tend to call themselves “Democracies.”
And what your idiotic and fervid minds have come up with with these “the president should be elected by popular vote” or “We should just all have the same value for votes, and ignore how each state votes” (Yes, I know, children, what you actually mean is “I want everyone to do what I think is right.” Because you’re infants who were never given a modicum of civilizing influence) is just that type of democracy. What would end up happening is that you’d despoil the land WITHOUT EVEN KNOWING YOU WERE DOING IT.
Because states are not run according to a Republican form of government but more like direct democracies, for instance, your congeneres in the big cities run the mentally handicapped glorious bearflag people’s republic. Which is why your hairspray-model governor, from the Pelosi crime family, thinks that it makes sense to ban the internal combustion engine and throw money at trains to nowhere, even as his state budget crashes and productive citizens and businesses leave his state in droves (and u-hauls, and shank’s pony if nothing else is available.)
Why? Because Governor Hairspray is governing according to the priorities of his set, the people he lives among all the time. They all obsess about global warming, (mostly because the models on that are as credible as the computer models for Winnie the Flu) to the point of being convinced that fires are due to that, and not forest management; they all obsess about the plight of the homeless, even though the only homeless they have any contact with are the people they buy crack from; they all think that poverty and crime is due to lack of material goods (that good old, insulting and obsolete Marxist model), they all can either walk to the deli-on-the-corner or be driven there, but they imagine the peasants can take public transport.
So, why would anyone need internal combustion vehicles, except that they are hating haters who hate? Or, you know, perhaps they’re long haul truckers, or people who farm, or even someone who lives 20 miles from the nearest grocery.
In other words, the problem with direct democracy is a problem of knowledge.
Voting is a way to allow everyone to vote their own best interests. Which means, for instance, that knowing what life is like for the self-employed writers, I’d be unlikely to support measures that punish self-employed or gig workers.
This would work great in a democracy, supposing the majority of the voting pool were self-employed, gig workers. Since they’re not, a lot of states have tax penalties on the self employed because to the man (and woman, etc) on the street and for reasons known only to their psychiatrists, or perhaps the writers of sitcoms, “self employed” means doctors and lawyers, and those — again in the average person’s head — are all “rich” and “deserve to pay.” (What the actual deserts are of people making it in professions that have arduous and near impossible to finish training, much less succeed at is complicated.) So, a lot of us writers pay an extra tax penalty, because the knowledge we even exist (and not as millionaires, again, thank you TV writers for that bit of insanity) much less are self-employed is not widespread.
In the same way, a popular vote election would work really well, if the US were a completely homogeneous country. You know, people were evenly distributed and all had the same resources and capabilities.
I don’t know? Maybe it’s possible to model such a country in minecraft or another computer simulation. But that’s not the world we live in.
Ultimately, our founders, faced with what to them — and compared to European countries — was a vast territory filled with disparate cultures and disparate people conceived of a way to maximize the knowledge of the voter about the relevant issues and the people the voters would trust to represent them.
And partly because the disparate territory (much larger and more disparate now) was already separate states, they decided to emphasize the power of the states, instead of the power of the federal government. Yeah, that got a bit blow out of the water after the civil war. I do realize that. And frankly a lot of the cure for what ails us would be curbing the power of the federal government. Not that any of you cartoon characters want to do that. No, you just want people to do exactly what you think is good and right.
Fortunately the founding fathers were smarter than you are. Don’t feel too bad. They were smarter, better read and better educated than just about anyone.
So, instead of making it one man one vote across this great land, they had the states have so many “electoral votes” and created the electoral college.
We can go into how that has been manipulated, etc, but you don’t want to hear my command of swearing in seven languages, particularly because I’ve forgotten the grammar for most of those.
All you need to know, though, is that if it were one-man-one-vote (and for man read woman, wingless dragon, red-hair-dyed problematic gender, etc.) we would be ruled by five cities. Because those cities contain the majority of the population in the country.
And then we too could be just like Europe — spit — where the urban “elites” think they know what’s good for everyone. So, you know, being obsessively worried about how farting cows are making everything burn up (in 12 years! This time we swear it’s real!) they’ll order farmers to dispose of herds of dairy cows that took generations to perfect. Or tell people who live in the middle of nowhere they can’t drive.
In Europe, because people don’t always obey the government, the collapse is very slow (though rather obvious in the fact that most people have chosen not to have children. That’s the ultimate vote.) Other places, where the “elites” were even dumber and running in possession of Marxism (much much more dangerous than running with scissors) the crash is much faster. See, Venezuela, or Cuba, or even (though they won’t let you see it, until it bursts like a boil in the face of the world) China.
Given that all of you little Dunning-Kruger-rands are convinced that this time you’ll do communism right, and that you have the answers to everything, you’d probably manage to crash us even faster than Venezuela.
We’ve seen what you in the big cities and the government (BIRM) got up to with COVIDiocy, for instance. The idea all restaurants must be half of capacity, for instance, makes sense in NYC (maybe) because I’ve been there. Their restaurants set tables on top of each other. Note the rest of the country already is double that distance, NATURALLY. Or consider mask mandates. They make sort of sense if you must ride the subway, carrying groceries in both hands. I mean, if you sneeze, it’s going to go all over. I hate to tell you, but we don’t even have subways. And I go up in an elevator maybe once a month, and can avoid it if I so wish.
Which means your mask mandates do NOTHING. Absolutely fricking nothing. Except cause those of us who are asthmatic or have issues getting enough oxygen to be hypoxic on the regular.
However, perhaps the Covidiocy that’s most illustrative or your rank (and it is rank) and aggressive stupidity and provincialism, is the number of you who keep insisting we can stay locked up forever or until there’s a vaccine.
Cupcakes, even if this were half as deadly as you seem to think it is, even if this were for real small pox or the bubonic plague, you only think eternal lockdowns are possible because you can do your job just as well from home, or you have enough resources to stay home without requiring the earning of more money.
That means you are something less than 20% of the population, and mostly a knowledge-worker. There’s no shame in it. So am I. And my life has changed very little because I was already a semi-recluse introverted geek.
But the people who grow your food, make the things you use, and transport them, for that matter, need to be out there, and need to be working. And before you go into upper-class-white-knight mode and tell me I can’t require the poor and less educated (note, many aren’t) to risk themselves, what you are actually saying is “I don’t believe people need food or material goods anymore. We can all live on air and airy ideas.”
Because these people need to work, so they feed and clothe themselves and others. No amount of money printing or subsidies will cause food to appear out of thin air, nor add an ounce of fabric to your frozen back.
So, while the knowledge-class votes disproportionately and also disproportionately thinks they’re capable of running everyone’s lives, it ain’t necessarily so. They mostly know their own set and the conditions pertaining to their own set.
Oh, and since you think you’re so smart, consider that most people aren’t. There is no such thing as a place where most people are smart. For whatever your definition of “smart” is. (You ain’t, kiddies. You’re just well indoctrinated.) By laws of reality, about half the people are below average. And honestly, because of the way intelligence works, 10% of the people think the other 90% are morons. (Regardless of how you define smart and intelligence.) Also, even the 10% can be brilliant in their field, specialty or area of interest and total idiots in all others. (As much as I read, study and research, my commenters routinely catch me in elementary mistakes in THEIR areas of expertise.)
You are not a perfect person. No matter what your mommy, daddy and professors told you, you can’t and won’t ever know everything. And IF you did, you’d be an extreme minority.
This means “democracy” as in letting everyone vote and having every vote count exactly the same means truly, bizarrely stupid decisions will be made. And the most productive, smarter, best motivated, and most willing to work will in fact be the sheep in that one sheep and two wolves. We’ve seen that story over and over again.
Which is why we don’t care if you’ve thrown yourself to the floor in the grocery store and are screaming and sobbing “but I wanna wanna wanna democracy.” We’re not going to let you have it.
Because the founding fathers created an oasis of prosperity and innovation in this land of ours, and that’s not common in history. To quote a man who was much, much smarter than you even think you are:
“Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.””Robert A. Heinlein
If you want that “democracy” bad luck, I will personally help you pack. I think there are still flights leaving for Venezuela, but if not, we’ll be glad to arrange for drive-through rights for you to go and join their brilliant experiment. (Well, they SAY they’re a democracy. And they’re ending the way democracies usually do.)
Until then shut up, wipe your nose, and learn to live in a democratic republic.
Because we’re not about to let you destroy it.
See, we know history. And using that knowledge, we know your wish for democracy is like the dog’s wish to catch a car. He wouldn’t know what to do with it if he caught it, and it would probably kill him.