April 15, 2009

---

Democracy and Socialism are Cousins:
"Tyranny of the Majority"

---

Source: Tom DeWeese
Destroy Electoral College and wipe out freedom

Source: Walter Williams
The dangers of majoritarian tyranny

---

The typical media-Scribe Propaganda

"Let the people decide."
    "It's the American way."
        "It's Democracy at work."
            "It's more fair"

Yep, that's why America was never set up as a democracy.

The anti-media-Scribe Reality

"Democracy is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch."
    "Majority rule violates the rights of minorities".
        "Democracy is a lynch mob."

Tyranny has many forms

Walter Williams lays it out straight. -- A vote by the majority is tyranny!

While Democracy may appear to be legitimate, moral and just, it is still tyranny!

It matters not if one tyrant makes a decision for you, or if an entire room of tyrants makes a decision for you. -- It is still tyranny!

It matters not even if you are a member of the majority and that you approve the decision. -- The fact is that the decision made was not yours to make, the decision was made by the majority. -- the decision was made by "society".

This is the very definition of socialism, is it not?

Do you see ANY moral definition of "individual" freedom ("individual" rule), contained in the word Democracy, where "the majority rules"?

The example of the HOA Tyranny

Homeowner's Associations (HOAs) are prime examples of tyranny by the majority.

Where in days of old, a man's home was his castle, the one place on earth he could rule as he sees fit -- has now sucummed to "Democracy".

Now, you can only paint your home the colors your neighbors approve of, not to help you, but so that it will help them sell their home easier.

And if you resist, then the HOA will get government to intervene to remind you of the HOA contract you were forced to sign; that is, the contract you had to sign if you wanted to buy the house.

Abortion Tyranny

Soon, the majority in Congress, which represents the majority of Americans, will be deciding if a doctor can continue to practice medicine, even if he finds it morally offensive to perform abortions and as an individual, refuses to do abortions.

Would that not be tyranny?

Tyranny to Walter Williams

How many decisions in our day-to-day lives would we like to be made through majority rule or the democratic process?

How about the decision whether you should watch a football game on television or "Law and Order"? What about whether you drive a Chevrolet or a Ford, or whether your Easter dinner is turkey or ham?

Were such decisions made in the political arena, most of us would deem it tyranny.

Why isn't it also tyranny for the democratic process to mandate what type of light bulbs we use, how many gallons of water to flush toilets or whether money should be taken out of our paycheck for retirement?

Our founders intended for us to have a republican form of limited government where the protection of individual God-given rights was the primary job of government.

--Walter Williams

                                         
    America was created,    
        by the Founders,        
    who were themselves    
        representatives          
  of the original 13 States, 
      as a representative      
          Republican form          
    of limited government,    
      created to protect      
          State's rights          
                  and                  
            individual            
            God-given            
              rights              
                           
The States who sent representatives to the first, and so far only, Constitutional Convention, saw themselves (the States) as the Board of Directors of the Federal Government, with the President of the United States as the CEO. Their seat on the Board of Directors was represented in Congress by the Senate, where each State legislature sent two representatives.

Democracy, and its cousin Socialism, in their minds was one of the worst forms of government.

"Measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority."
...
"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."

--James Madison, Federalist Paper No. 10

---

Measures in the Constitution to protect against tyranny by majority

---

Electoral College -- Our President was not to be elected by the majority. He was to represent the States, the People, and every geographic region. Hence, the electoral college was created as a merge of all three. As in Congress, each State gets two electoral votes and each House geographic district gets one electoral vote. This prevents three majority tyrannies.

1) If the Presidency were decided by the States only, then the farming states, with small numbers of people, would dominate the people in the large industrial population centers.

2) If the Presidency were decided by the people only, then the 9 States containing over 50% of the population would dominate the other 41 States.

3) If the Presidency were decided by a simple nation-wide majority vote, instead of by a majority of districts, then one geographic area of America, such as the Atlantic seaboard, would dominate all others.

Senate and House of Representatives -- In Congress, we now have a tyranny of the people's majority, as the 17th Amendment broke the Founder's intent to prevent this tyranny. (See "Corrupt Senate? Thank the 17th Amendment") In the beginning of our limited Republic, the people was geographically represented by the House, while the State was represented by the Senate. State legislators selected the Senators. Now sadly, the same "Saturday Night Live" brain-washed people who elected the House member also elected the Senator, hence doubling the errors.

The Senate can "check and balance" the House and vice-verse.

The Presidential Veto -- If the President feels that the majority of both State and people are abusive of their powers, the President can veto their new law. To pass the law, the majority tyranny would have to find more supporters to override the veto with a 2/3rds vote in Congress.

The veto provides a "checks and balance" against tyranny by the majority.

Lifetime appointments in the Judicial Branch -- If both the President and Congress both become captured by the tyranny of the majority, then judges that do not have to be elected, can have the freedom to decide that particular laws are not promoting freedom.

Lifetime appointments provides a "checks and balances" against the tyranny of the ballot box.

Enumerated Powers -- This part of the Constitution clearly lays out what the Federal government's responsibilities were to be. Clearly, Congress had no powers that were not listed in Article 1, section 8.

This, with the Tenth Amendment added to be sure, provided a "checks and balances" against mission creep by the Federal government moving into the governance of the State and hijacking State responsibilities.

The Bill of Rights -- The enumerated powers protected mostly State rights, but should any of the three branches of government not know what is expected of them concerning the individual rights of individuals, then the Bill of Rights clearly lays it out to them.

The Bill of Rights implies that Congress was mistrusted the most, since the First Amendment starts of with "Congress shall NOT..."

In addition to staying within the enumerated powers in the Constitution, Congress was also supposed to stay within the restrictions contained in the Bill of Rights.

---

How did it all fail?

---

Tyranny of Mass Media

First and foremost, the First Amendment did not envision one man having the capability of holding an instrument that could record his speech and then instantaneously distribute that speech to each and every citizen of the United States. Our Founders would have been appaled to see a small group of men at five media outlets have a virtual monopoly control of all information distributed within the United States.

Instead of modifying the Constitution to get rid of the Electoral College or to define marriage, the Constitution needs to be modified to prevent a monopoly of the life-blood of a free people, their means of obtaining information.

Tyranny of the People, because the Constitution has been broken

Second, the 17th Amendment needs to be repealed in order to prevent the tyranny of the majority of the People.

The States started to see their power slowly slip away from them, starting in 1913. Elections each two years saw a new breed of Senator, elected by popular vote, enter the Senate, until the 1920's the job was complete. Slowly, the new judges they "approved" would overwhelm the last bastion of limited Constitutional government, until by the time FDR was in office, the coup d'etat was complete.

Suggestions for a Christian Solution

These Christian Solutions and several others can be found here.

---

Article located at:
http://thechristiansolution.com/doc2009/165_DemocracyTyranny.html

---

The Christian Solution ^©             First Release: March 15, 2008