That’s called something else. And America invented it.
Beyond the daily caterwauling of the Media, there are now appearing more learned articles by people average people never heard of who are proclaiming that Trump’s election challenges are directed at “destroying our democracy”, or “aiming at creating a dictatorship’, or words to that effect. Since the old Fabian-socialists not for one moment ever believed in any “democracy” other than “social(ist) democracy” and always knew that their social democracy was by the 20%, them included, one wonders who they are addressing, and why?
Preluded by a year-long series of riots and mayhem in several American cities; property damage alongside violence, even a few deaths, and profit to be made by rioting…which has coincidentally stopped now that their political objective is within reach…the nationwide focus has turned to the Election, which, like twin planets, has spun simultaneously in different directions, so that astronomers cannot tell which is the proper spin, clockwise, or counterclockwise.
Two separate realities.
Arguments aside, what we do know is these two realities cannot long co-exist. And after four long years of wrangling, the election will reveal and decide which reality the majority of the American people arrived. Or not.
What you must first realize is that both of these “realities” argue that they are playing by the same rules. An even more remarkably, that they are playing for the same doctrine; both the concept and the paper version; the Constitution and “democracy”.
Of course, one of these contestants cannot not be speaking the truth, except perhaps to themselves. The common sense political tendency is to say one side is lying, but in the ideological arena the academic will say that may not entirely be true, but also no, though not out loud, that the ideological truth outweighs the common sense truth. Or, as Richard Pryor once said, “Who are you going to believe, me, or you own damned lying eyes?”
Ideology can always disillusion people about reality itself, rendering them delusional. But so can even hand-to-eye “common sense” once the gaslighting of even objective, observable truth moves into its second and third generation. FA Hayek warned us about this in his 1956 Preface to his Road to Serfdom (he wrote four). I’ll discuss Hayek later, but he is especially relevant in these times, since few of us are academically skilled enough to write and publish a peer-reviewed paper distinguishing between a lie and a delusion, even though in any fact-finding court, evidence could be brought forward to to show that what is known as “common sense” among the un-lettered 80% of the world is a rendering of certain realities the academicians overlook.
FA Hayek noted this phenomenon in Road to Serfdom was first published in 1943, at the London School of Economics, a famous Fabian-socialists economics research institute, and while very anti-Socialist was nonetheless published. But in America it was even a best-seller of sorts, only to readers who were, shall we say, “non-economists”. Hayek’s ideas found favor in a nation of readers who were not academicians but rather people from all walks of life, and business, who were interested in how things work instead of how things “ought” to work in a “planned society”….which throughout history, involved only about 20% of the population, all of whom worked for or protected the planners, probably as far back as the engineers who designed and built the Pyramids…simply for the glorification of a king.)
It’s in this factual rather that idealized notion of “how things work” that courts can outweigh peer-review, and carry with them the weight of Law, as their rules of evidence are such that fact and non-fact can be reasonably distinguished…although often, these days, it take two-three levels of appeals to find where old-fashioned reason exists.
You don’t have to be Emile Zola (of “J’Accuse” Dreyfuss Affair fame…that’s for those of you who read…I saw the 1958 film) to know that even at the highest levels of government, with the willing assistance of the press, you can push virtually any non-truth you wish. For most of the world that has been a standing rule for 5000 years, when the first Pyramid was erected.
But this kind of state power was more difficult in America because the 20%; from king, dictator, general secretary, even elected president of France, Germany, etc, all the way down through their legislatures (which America’s birth forced them to mimic just to keep the people peaceable with their government), to the military and police (often the same), to universities, to the Bureaucracy, i.e., deep state) are in the direct employ of the 80%.
Arguably, through “Incestuous intermarriage” in the political classes and all sorts of financial schemes and arrangements, including a welfare sub-state of the poor, also alliances, even illegals, who also seem to be voting along with dead people, we can reasonably calculate that the ruling class has risen to as high as 35%-40%, although Donald Trump has proved how flexible many of that 40% are to changing sides…if they can be lured out of the welfare class with real jobs and a pathway to self-respect without having to pay a bribe-price to the state class for the gift and an education system that teaches that such Good things are a gift from God, not the state, and is a property of citizenship.
Hayek believed that instinct for freedom can only survive 2-3 generations in the well-tended welfare state, so you can see America may be at a tipping point.
So who are they alerting to this new “dictatorship” to? The forum would suggest that they are not writing these words to affect the thinking of the college-grad 21-old, but more toward the inside-the-London-School-of-Economics set, the academicians.
This isn’t a signal of “To Arms”, To Arms!” But this could be a signal “to be afraid”. A sentiment with which I agree.
