Red Pill History: Why the Founders Didn’t Want Democracy

Red Pill Theory

Intro

Pure democracy – using a direct vote to decide on policy issues – is not only inefficient, but dangerous. People often associate “more voting” with “more freedom,” but this view is short-sighted. History shows that pure democracy almost always devolves into a tyranny of the majority or “mob rule.” In such a system there’s nothing stopping the majority from voting to enslave a minority group, or choosing to give themselves more benefits until the national coffer runs dry.

For these reasons the Founders were dead-set against Democracy. James Madison wrote in his famous paper Federalist No. 10: “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; they have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

We are so used to associating Democracy and voting with “freedom,” that the idea of restraining any democratic impulse at first may seem odd or authoritarian. I’ll explain more later on, but the modern emphasis on democracy is actually Socialist in nature and is purposefully designed to create a smokescreen for tyranny to hide behind. In reality, a constitutional republic – based on objective truth and limited government – is the only way to maximize Freedom for all.

The Death of the Republic

The Constitution is supposed to act as a limiting force against both elite domination and tyranny of the majority (i.e. “mob rule”). As we all know, the original constitution compartmentalized the State’s power into separate branches (Executive, Judicial, Legislative) in order to prevent the accumulation of power in one centralized group. The Constitution also protected against tyranny “from below” by initially preventing the direct election of Presidents and Senators. Senators were selected by State congresses, and Presidents were chosen by electors the States sent to Washington. The House, of course, was directly elected by the public. Balance and homeostasis were sought on every level.

Today, however, the US is far more “democratic” than the Founders ever intended. We now directly elect Senators and Presidents, though voting rights are not the main point of this article. They are just one example of a shift towards equality (i.e. “democracy”) in the modern United States. From redistributing wealth via Welfare to public “education” to unisex bathrooms, there are countless examples of the country moving away from Republicanism and towards socialism (for the general public). As with any Socialist system, there is a group of elite managers who remain outside the system and live by their own set of rules.

The problem with “equality” (a concept that Democracy and socialism consider sacred) is that it doesn’t exist. It’s an ideal. A nice idea perhaps, but one that has absolutely no basis in objective reality. Clearly some people possess more knowledge and wisdom than others. Some are harder working and more productive than their peers. Certain people are born with enormous gifts for sport or art or science. Differences are part of nature and therefore must be reflected in a nation’s system of governance. To deny that people are different is to create a form of government that is unnatural/based on fantasy. Those do not end well.

Equality Leads to Tyranny

Madison wrote in Federalist #10: “Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government [Democracy], have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.”

Schools and the media constantly bombard us with this idea of equality. Equality is held up as a sacred virtue – something that we must continually strive to more fully embody. In reality, however, to insist on equality is to insist on a culture united by its lowest common denominator (since that’s the only thing we all equally share.) Such a culture can then be controlled by a few who are intelligent enough to see past this popular “equality cult.”

As aforementioned, humans are very different in their levels of intelligence, talent, productivity, ambition, skills, awareness, etc. The only place you find “equality” in humans is in their more basic needs and drives. We all need shelter, food, and companionship. Only a tiny minority like writing advanced computer algorithms, but almost everyone enjoys having sex and watching television.

Socialists claim that “equality” equals Freedom since differentials in power are eliminated and people are no longer “oppressed.” However, in reality, forcing people to be “equal” is to force them to live in a society ruled by its baser tendencies. It reduces man to a Herd animal, which is the exact opposite of Freedom.

Once you have people thinking that Herd-like behavior is “Freedom,” they can then easily be controlled. This is not a conspiracy theory or a point taken from some Far Right message board, by the way, it’s actually written about in social engineering manuals like Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Ervin Laszlo’s The Systems Approach to World Order, and Kurt Lewin’s various papers.

Even in a society where everyone thinks equality is the rule of the day, there are obviously still leaders who must manage the system. These people are then easily able to garner tremendous power while publicly talking about equality for all. The American Republic was specifically designed to prevent the rise of this kind of duplicitous technocratic class, but alas we have fallen asleep and let it happen over the past hundred or so years.

Conclusion

The concept of ‘equality’ doesn’t exist in nature. It is Doublespeak used by an elite to present Herd-like behavior as desirable and “free.” All the institutions – from public schools to unisex bathrooms – function in a similar manner. We need to return to objective truth, admit humans have differences, and restore a Constitutional form of government that has built in checks against Tyranny. Though, to be honest, it may be too late. We are so much farther along in this process of “Change” than I can encapsulate in just one post. Wake up!