Please Stop Using The “D” Word

Repeatedly, in this blog, I have tried to make the point that the United States of America was established as a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy.  Obviously the talking heads around the country do not read my blog because it seems that I hear the D word with ever increasing frequency.  Last evening, I heard a clip from an old Ronald Reagan speech where even he referred to our “great democracy”.

Now I understand why the liberal/socialist forces push the idea of democracy.  It is because true democracies are not restrained by bothersome nonsense like, say, constitutions.  In other words, the more they can get America to think of itself as a democracy, the easier it is to ignore our Constitution, a document that, if followed, can really frustrate their attempts to socialize the nation.

But what of the others, even arch conservatives like Reagan?  Why ever would he, or anyone of like political leaning, want to think of America as a democracy?  I admit that this is one question I do not have an easy answer for.  I can only guess that even Presidents of the United States don’t really know the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy.  To the extent that there may be accuracy in this guess, I can only blame our illustrious “school system” which, from kindergarten through the university level, seems intent on indoctrinating our youth on the glories of the collective and the evils of individualism and self interest.

Some of you might reasonably ask “what is wrong with democracy?  isn’t it fair to everyone?”.  I will be the first to admit that it can seem that way, especially to young, idealistic minds.  Indeed, I still remember a younger version of myself writing a paper on democracy in junior high school.  A paper that quite impressed the teacher.  As I reflect back on it, what it really was, was documented proof that I did not have a clue what I was writing about.  It was just an echo of what I had been taught, with no rational thought on my part.  But it seemed so right at the time.  But I digress — back to the question I posed on your behalf…

The rather complicated answer to “what is wrong with democracy” is that there are a number of potentially fatal flaws in a true democracy.  We can start with the most obvious flaw, one that we are grappling with this very day, that being the ability of a large group to band together to vote themselves largesse from the public treasury.  In other words, to use government to plunder their fellow citizens.  The next most obvious flaw is that democracy gives the majority the right and the means to abuse minorities.  If you know anything of our history, you know that we did a pretty good job of abusing minorities, even with the limitations and protections of our Constitution.  One can only imagine what might have happened had there been true democracy back then.  I think it safe to suggest, at a minimum, that the Civil Rights movement would never have gained traction.

Yet there are still many flaws that, while perhaps less obvious, still have the potential to cause great harm.  One such is the notion of known and predictable rules.  With a constitution (that is, a constitution that is actually followed), there are preset limits to what government, in the name of the people, can do.  And, there are outright prohibitions against certain potential government activities.  And, the only way the people can get around these limits is to amend the constitution itself.  A task intentionally made difficult to discourage frivolous changes.  Ergo, a level of constancy and predictability exists.  Contrast this with the absolute lack of predictability that can exist in a true democracy where the rules are whatever the majority say they are, on any given day.  Rules that can be changed at any time, simply at the whim of the majority, no rationality required.

Why does this matter so much?  Let’s try to illustrate using a simple example.  Most of us have found ourselves in a social situation where someone proposes to teach the rest of us a new game.  But, rather than presenting us with a documented set of rules to go by, they explain the rules as the game is played.  When this happens to me, it seems that each new rule that is exposed works against whatever I was trying to do and in favor of the purveyors of the new game.  It can seem (and may sometimes be true) that they are actually making up the rules as we go, always in their own favor of course.  Now this might be tolerable, even amusing, in a social setting where it is, after all, an innocent game where nothing tangible is actually won or lost.  But imagine such a scenario in the real world where business and investment decisions are constantly being made.  How comfortable would you be risking millions of dollars on a business plan, knowing all the while that the majority could, at any moment, change the rules such that you lose your investment?  I dare say you would not be inclined to make many major investments.  Indeed, do we see a form of this happening at this very moment?

There are other subtle flaws as well but I think those illustrated here should be sufficient to make any rational being flee democracy like they would flee a new outbreak of plague.  If only we had more rational behavior and less of the emotion-driven kind.  The answer, as my friend Dae keeps saying, is real education.  Not socialist indoctrination, not political correctness, but real education.  The kind where the students are taught to think for themselves, using rationality and critical thinking.

Why do we continue to tolerate and pay through the nose for anything less?  Get mad, raise hell, and tell your would-be masters that you are not going to take it anymore.  And keep your weapons oiled in case they are hard of hearing.

Tweet This Post