Democracy is Dead
Democracy is dead.
I recently wrote articles condemning Liberalism, the Separation of Church and State, and Americanism.
Needless to say, they were pretty controversial.
The only reason this is the case is that people still believe the American ideologies of Democracy and Liberalism.
I am not sure why. Democracy is dead. It has become rule of the mob, and the mob wants bad things.
While we once were a country with Christian values, now we are a country that pushes satanic values.
Our country pushes abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, divorce, fornication, immodesty, disobedience and other horrors.
To me, it is obvious that the American experiment has failed.
When given the chance to vote people vote for leaders that enforce the horrors that I pointed out above.
They don’t vote for leaders that protect Christian morality whatsoever.
Our president even claims to be Catholic, but he refuses to defend Catholic social teachings!
Instead he defends “Democracy” and “Liberalism” over the teachings of Christ’s Church.
Now THAT is the exact opposite of what a God has called a State leader to do.
In those days there was no king in Israel: but every one did that which seemed right to himself.
Judges 24:25
Table of Contents
The Old Democracies, What Happened
In the ancient times, kings ruled most civilizations.
Of course we had the democratic city-states of Greece and the Roman Republic.
What happened to them?
Oh! That’s right; democracy died, and leaders like Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar took over!
Speaking of these old democracies, certain philosophers of those times warned of the dangers of democracies even then.
Let’s see what they said.
Plato On Democracy
The philosopher Plato, who lived in democratic ancient Athens, wrote on how Democracy degenerates into tyranny:
And then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power;
The Republic
…democracy, which is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.
Ibid.
And does not tyranny spring from democracy…? Freedom…which, as they tell you in a democracy, is the glory of the State—and that therefore in a democracy alone will the freeman of nature deign to dwell.
Ibid.
Now, in such a State, can liberty have any limit?…By degrees the anarchy finds a way into private houses, and ends by getting among the animals and infecting them…I mean that the father grows accustomed to descend to the level of his sons and to fear them, and the son is on a level with his father, he having no respect or reverence for either of his parents; and this is his freedom
Ibid.
And these are not the only evils…there are several lesser ones: In such a state of society the master fears and flatters his scholars, and the scholars despise their masters and tutors; young and old are all alike; and the young man is on a level with the old, and is ready to compete with him in word or deed; and old men condescend to the young and are full of pleasantry and gaiety; they are loth to be thought morose and authoritative, and therefore they adopt the manners of the young.
Ibid.
…nor must I forget to tell of the liberty and equality of the two sexes in relation to each other.
Ibid.
…and as the result of all, see how sensitive the citizens become; they chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority, and at length, as you know, they cease to care even for the laws, written or unwritten; they will have no one over them.
Ibid.
The ruin of oligarchy is the ruin of democracy; the same disease magnified and intensified by liberty overmasters democracy—the truth being that the excessive increase of anything often causes a reaction in the opposite direction…The excess of liberty, whether in States or individuals, seems only to pass into excess of slavery.
Ibid.
Then, in order that we may see clearly what we are doing, let us imagine democracy to be divided, as indeed it is, into three classes; for in the first place freedom creates rather more drones in the democratic than there were in the oligarchical State…And in the democracy they are certainly more intensified…in a democracy they are almost the entire ruling power, and while the keener sort speak and act, the rest keep buzzing about the bema and do not suffer a word to be said on the other side; hence in democracies almost everything is managed by the drones.
Ibid.
Then there is another class which is always being severed from the mass…They are the orderly class, which in a nation of traders is sure to be the richest…They are the most squeezable persons and yield the largest amount of honey to the drones…And this is called the wealthy class, and the drones feed upon them
Ibid.
The people are a third class, consisting of those who work with their own hands; they are not politicians, and have not much to live upon. This, when assembled, is the largest and most powerful class in a democracy…And do they not share?…Do not their leaders deprive the rich of their estates and distribute them?…And the persons whose property is taken from them are compelled to defend themselves before the people as they best can?…And then, although they may have no desire of change, the others charge them with plotting against the people and being friends of oligarchy?
Ibid.
And the protector of the people…having a mob entirely at his disposal, he is not restrained from shedding the blood of kinsmen; by the favourite method of false accusation he brings them into court and murders them, making the life of man to disappear, and with unholy tongue and lips tasting the blood of his fellow citizens; some he kills and others he banishes, at the same time hinting at the abolition of debts and partition of lands: and after this, what will be his destiny? Must he not either perish at the hands of his enemies, or from being a man become a wolf—that is, a tyrant?
Ibid.
Read what Plato wrote. Let it sink in. Plato wrote about how the excess of liberty leads to mob tyranny.
It always starts with revolution, like in the US. Democracy then promotes equality to the unequal.
Then the “equality” revolution will move to homes, schools, workplaces, the sexes, etc.
Everyone will see themselves as equal and there will be no order to society.
If you read this with today’s understanding, Plato is talking about how Democracy will lead to Socialism.
Is this not happening? Lets look at American politics. We elect impotent, useless bureaucrats, or drones.
The Democrats are the drones that try to please.
They promise us wealth redistribution and pass laws to degenerate society to please us.
The Republicans pay lip service to the conservatives, while doing essentially nothing.
And now we have a growing mob of “woke” liberals that make false accusations and want bloodshed.
Our society is degenerating into a tyrannical socialist state because that’s what Democracy does, according to Plato.
Aristotle on Democracy
In his famous work, Politics, Plato’s student Aristotle says this regarding the perverted form of government:
Of the above-mentioned forms, the perversions are as follows: of royalty, tyranny; of aristocracy, oligarchy; of constitutional government, democracy. For tyranny is a kind of monarchy which has in view the interest of the monarch only; oligarchy has in view the interest of the wealthy; democracy, of the needy: none of them the common good of all.
Politics, Book 3, Part VII
Notice that Democracy is a perverted form of constitutional government.
Obviously, the US is a constitutional government. But has the US degenerated into Democracy?
What are Aristotle’s criticisms of Democracy?
Aristotle writes, regarding the error of “equality” in Democracies:
As, however, those who are equal in one thing ought not to have an equal share in all, nor those who are unequal in one thing to have an unequal share in all, it is certain that all forms of government which rest on either of these principles are perversions.
Politics, Book 3, Part XIII
So like Plato, Aristotle also criticizes the tendency of Democracies to assign equality to unequal members of society.
But what does Aristotle see as the distinction between a valid constitutional government and Democracy?
Aristotle further writes:
One who asks the law to rule, therefore, is held to be asking god and intellect alone to rule, while one who asks man adds the beast. Desire is a thing of this sort; and spiritedness perverts rulers and the best men. Hence law is intellect without appetite
Politics, Book 3, Part XVI
This is a very important point.
No matter what kind of government exists, the rule of law is the most important part.
Once you sacrifice focus on the rule of law for law of man, the whole system becomes corrupt.
My argument is that Catholic teaching should be the rule of law.
Obviously, the US and other Western countries do not have a Catholic rule of law.
However, the US does have a rule of law, the Constitution.
And within a century we have seen mob rule erode this rule of law.
Pornography, abortion, homosexual marriage, no-fault divorce were not things part of the original rule of law.
But the “woke” Social Marxists have bullied the law makers to change the law to meet their demands.
If this is happening, then is our constitutional government still valid?
Or has it degenerated into a tyrannical Democracy? I would argue the latter.
Angelic Doctor of the Church, St. Thomas Aquinas on Democracy
St. Thomas built upon the philosophies of Aristotle (and by extension, Plato).
In his letter On Kingship to the King of Cyprus, St. Thomas writes, regarding bad forms of governments:
If, finally, the bad government is carried on by the multitude, it is called a democracy, i.e. control by the populace, which comes about when the plebeian people by force of numbers oppress the rich. In this way the whole people will be as one tyrant.
De Regno, Chapter 2
Just like the philosophers that influenced him, St. Thomas doesn’t think highly of Democracy.
St. Thomas sees democracy as a tyrannical mob.
Isn’t this what the “woke” Social Marxists are in our country?
St. Thomas continues:
Furthermore, it is evident that several persons could by no means preserve the stability of the community if they totally disagreed.
De Regno, Chapter 3
It’s obvious that our country is full of people that disagree to the point where they cannot make decisions.
The mob of cannot make decisions because the grave error of liberalism has resulted in a nation full of individuals.
Instead of pursuing the common good, everyone pursues their own interests, which means constant conflict.
Finally, St. Thomas lists the governments from best to worst:
…monarchy is better than aristocracy, and aristocracy better than polity—so the contrary will be true of an unjust government, namely, that the ruling power will be more harmful in proportion as it is more unitary. Consequently, tyranny is more harmful than oligarchy; and oligarchy more harmful than democracy.
De Regno, Chapter 4
Pope Leo XIII on Democracy
Speaking of the common good, Pope Leo XIII writes this regarding the French government:
Various political governments have succeeded one another in France during the last century, each having its own distinctive form: the Empire, the Monarchy, and the Republic. By giving one’s self up to abstractions, one could at length conclude which is the best of these forms, considered in themselves; and in all truth it may be affirmed that each of them is good, provided it lead straight to its end – that is to say, to the common good for which social authority is constituted
AU MILIEU DES SOLLICITUDES
Pope Leo XIII makes the point here that the government exists for the common good of society.
Whether the government is a monarchy, republic or Democracy it should always promote the common good.
But does our Democracy promote the common good? Is abortion the common good?
How about making a mockery of marriage? Is the sexual revolution the common good?
I could go on and on.
But if you are being honest, you know good and well that our Democracy doesn’t promote the common good.
Our Democracy only promotes the whims of the mob. It has become a tyranny of the uncommon bad.
Final Thoughts on Democracy
Democracy is dead. It was dead on arrival. It is only a matter of time before everyone sees it.
By then it may be too late, as we may degenerate into a socialist tyranny.
But that hasn’t happened yet. We need to embrace Christ the King, and maybe it will turn around.
What is the best form of government then?
Aristotle and St. Thomas both thought a mix of governments would be the best.
Plato believed in the Philosopher King. So this could be a Catholic Monarch.
Below him would be an aristocracy and possibly a class of representatives voted in by the people.
I am not really sure about all the details of what that would look like.
But I don’t think that it looks like what we have.
What we have is mob rule by “woke” social justice warriors.
I’d take a red pilled king over that any day of the week.
