There Is a Rotten Tree Growing in Our Minds

Don’t defend it. Don’t eat its fruit. Chop it down. (DN 1.18)

Cover page | Preface | Introduction 1 | Introduction 2 | Introduction 3 |

(Part I) Why: 1.0 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.8 | 1.9 | 1.10 | 1.11 | 1.12 | 1.13 | 1.14 | 1.15 | 1.16 | 1.17 | 1.18

---

Chapter 1: WHY

1.18 — The Democracy Problem, Part 5:
The Rotten Tree

There is a house in my neighborhood that flies a pirate flag with an amusing slogan: “The beatings will continue until morale improves.” Those words seem strangely apropos at the moment.

Over the last two weeks, we have been giving the concept of democracy a public flogging—one that it richly deserves.

We have demonstrated that it is fundamentally morally impermissible. Not merely “flawed,” but impermissible. If you believe in the concept of individual natural rights at all, then you must recognize this.

That should be the end of it, but just to be sure, we have continued the flogging…

We have discussed the tragic reality that democracy contains the seeds of its own demise. That it inevitably degrades the character of a civilization and its people. That it enables some to use and abuse others. That it gives voters control over your life, and let’s face it…a lot of voters just aren’t particularly good people.

Of course, even if they were all magically wonderful people, it is STILL completely unacceptable that anyone gets to impose things upon you against your will. At this point, that ought to be clear.

But I am still getting replies to the effect of…

We have to sacrifice some of our rights in order to live together.

The American Founders had the right idea. We just need to go with their original plan.

‘The people’ can fix this.

How much more flogging is required?

I guess my only remaining option is to pull out the big guns. I generally don’t do trigger warnings, but I do apologize for the graphic nature of what I am about to say…

Memes have a way of encapsulating complex ideas in ways that are easily grasped, and

David Jäkle

recently shared one that did an excellent job of illustrating the core problem with democratic systems.

The meme itself makes the point, but just to drive it home, Jäkle added the following pithy clarification:

“Gang rape is the will of the majority.”

Sorry, folks, but THAT is what democracy is. Do you understand?

If you want to continue to defend democracy, the only place to which to retreat now is to say that some sort of constitutional republic can mitigate this fundamental problem.

Mitigate, yes. Eliminate, no.

The American Founders knew this fundamental problem existed. They sought to mitigate it by building in various inefficiencies—to place a millstone around the neck of democracy so that it could not move too far, too fast, in any one direction. They used a Constitution to create a framework and some limitations upon government. They fashioned an indirect democracy and added some barriers between the ‘passions’ of ‘the people’ and the levers of power. But they could not get rid of the fundamental problem.

Astute opponents of the Constitution—the Antifederalists—saw the writing on the wall and forced the addition of a Bill of Rights. The Federalists promised in the Federalist Papers that the Antifederalists’ fears were ill-founded. Madison may have been sincere in those promises; Hamilton probably wasn’t. And either way, most of the bad things that the Federalists promised would not happen have, in fact, happened. And they still could not get rid of the fundamental problem.

In spite of this, our hopes and fears—and our patriotic programming—keep us locked in the delusion that all we need to do is to get back to their original vision.

In the next installment, we will deal with the notion of “getting back” to anything, but set that aside for now.

WHAT ORIGINAL VISION?

The one that failed to prevent us from getting here? The one that did not live up to its own promises? The one under which even Revolutionary hero John Adams thought it was okay to pass the Sedition Acts before the ink of that ‘vision’ was dry?

But even set all THAT aside for now, and recognize the far more fundamental problem. The problem that no amount of constitutions or checks and balances can solve:

All democratic systems put human rights up for a vote.

All such systems are nonconsensual. The best you can hope for, even with a powerful constitution, is to reduce the number of areas in which other human beings can violate rights through their votes.

For example, you could limit a democracy by stipulating in a written constitution that gang rape and murder are not allowed. But that would still leave other rights vulnerable to voters. They could still vote to take your money by force, for example.

You could try stripping voters and politicians of that power too, and that might help. But that still leaves the same basic problem: the presupposition that ANY rights may be subject to a vote.

Any system that empowers some human beings to do this, that, or the other thing to other human beings against their will is fundamentally wrong.

Not “flawed.” Not “fixable” with a stronger constitution.

Just wrong.

It does not matter how many words you put down on paper. If the core mechanism for decision-making is to enable some to cause things to happen to others against their will, then the system is morally non-viable.

With that as the core mechanism, the system will either be perverse, pervertible, or powerless to prevent its own perversion.

The vaunted American system imposes all sorts of things without the consent of the individual human person, including its own authority. It forces you to labor for the benefit of others, forcibly compels your actions and choices (even when you have harmed no one), and punishes you if you try to resist. That in and of itself is perverse.

And it was certainly perverse when its democratic processes produced the Sedition Act, Missouri Compromise, Kansas-Nebraska Act, Dred Scott, Korematsu, Wickard, Plessy…

Those things did not happen in spite of the system. They happened because of it. Because the system says it is okay to do things to the individual human person against his will.

Do you get it yet? The fundamental supposition of all democracies is WRONG. And yes, for the love of crumbcake, that includes the American constitutional republic in its original form.

You cannot fix this problem with any amount of tinkering or constitution-writing. The starting point is bad. A rotten tree will produce rotten fruit.

You should not want to restore this system. If other voters can dispense with your rights simply by voting, then the tree is rotten.

It is time to plant a new tree.

---

In a week or so, we will finish up this preliminary groundwork and begin that planting. Help me get there with your support!