Democracy is splendid so long as there are democrats and they know what democracy means
DEMOCRACY needs democrats. But if you don’t know what democracy is how can you call yourself a democrat? So, do you know? Test yourself!
What is democracy? Describe a working democracy? But here’s the hard one … What exactly is a democrat?
If that’s too easy we can move up to A-level type questions. Is a Democracy a system of governance sufficient in itself or does the source of its energies, laws, and norms reside above or beyond it? Can democracy exist without ethics? For example can a democracy exist independently of a supportive*, sympathetic religion; certainly a system of ethics with enough moral authority to discourage naked ambition in leaders and at the same time influence each and every member of the population, not only to live by the law, but to accept responsibility for personal behaviour according to the dictates of, say, natural law? N.B. The Ten Commandments are described as a privileged expression of the natural law.
*Any alternative ethical dynamic may be substituted here so long as it can supply the optimum freedom for every citizen with a minimum sacrifice of personal freedom for the needs of society at large. Such an ethical system must also be constant, equitable, and available to the widest possible consensus. In short, the morality must fit the man and fit his fellows.
Confucius the ancient Chinese philosopher taught that while it was possible to make the population behave (by the rigorous enforcement of a myriad rules) they could still defy the rules but nobody would feel shame in doing so.
G. K. Chesterton wrote: “You can free yourself from the big law (Decalogue) but you won’t be free. You will find yourself bound up in a million little rules”. Sounds so like political correctness!
Before you attempt an answer to the above, consider some alternatives of which we have hard historical experience.
There are absolute monarchies (historically rare in Europe); there are also benign monarchies in which a monarch sits as president of a parliament of national and international power interests and supplies on their behalf the interest of his own subjects, (European norm); oligarchies such as military governments; and aristocracies in which a king has usually abdicated his duties to speak for his people and dances instead to the tune of his courtiers, (France’s Sun King, some would say); then there are theocracies as sometimes in Syria and Iraq where the real power resides with religious leaders; we have also experienced State imposed ideologies such as Marxism, Russian and Chinese Communism, Nazism, and Italian Fascism. These are all very like theocracies but where the priests are apparatchiks (Government servants loyal only to State leaders who actually take the place of God); and as these last systems, theocratic or ideological, degrade and the leaders seize total power the government of the populations corrupts into totalitarianism.
Are there other forms of civic or social order?
There are satrap nations, known nowadays as satellite states where leaders are imposed upon a subject nation by its conquerors, or controlled by them. An emerging novelty is the domination of a country by an economic system over which it has no real sovereign influence — the canker in the soul of the European Union. This set-up could be described as a banker satrapy, that is, whichever body controls the economy controls the satellite members; nations like Greece, or Spain, or Ireland, or, … well you can fill in the gaps.
Is our way of life, despite local irritations, reasonably safe from the terrors enveloping so many nations around us. Will the monstrous TV images of urban warfare, shelled and crumbling tenements, public executions, and starving babes be the future of the good old U.K.?
Could our policemen strut as our warders. Can they already stop and search a citizen and enquire: “Do you have papers?” Well, yes, they can as it happens. Oh and they stick hi-vi vests on untrained, unlicensed unemployed characters with the words emblazoned on front and back: “Community enforcement officer”. Could our courts be turned into terrifying inquisitions suppressing common rights? Well, in the dock are countless law abiding mothers and fathers whose little ones have been appropriated by the State on the flimsiest grounds; that somebody, usually unknown and unknowable, has laid an accusation of child neglect, cruelty or abuse of some sort with the “authorities”. If you have the slightest doubt that it can happen to you or to somebody you know just call up the Sunday Telegraph cuttings library, or contact their campaigning reporter, Christopher Brooker. Not even a sovereign Member of Parliament dares to question the Star Chamber that the Children’s Court mandarins have become. The sacred privilege of free speech in the House of Commons has been taken away in the night of our democracy.
This reporter sat for an hour with the senior Scottish Office law officers and the Minister of State for Scotland (before the irruption of the flying Nats) and responded to their overt placing of a tape recorder on the table with one question written on his note-book. It read: “If my child is seized by the authorities on any accusation from any source, named or not, is it not the case that next time I see my child he shall be kept from me still and I shall be the plaintiff?”
Almost an hour later filled in with evasive ramblings a head nodded. I waited. At last the Minister admitted it was the case. If Andrew Neal is reading this he might be able to explain why the story I filed was published but all reference to the only essential point of the article had been edited out. The Scottish editor of the Sunday Times told me he had only been obeying orders from Mr Neal. But I only have the chap’s word for that. Mind you that tame editor had been one of my students at journalism college and another of that intake had gone on to become a very important judge, yet another was the Dire Straits guy who left it all for fame and riches but Mark Knopfler is a fine musician and I sometimes think his songs are better journalism than you get in the papers. The name of his group says all that needs be said if that’s what a headline is.
“within a few generations the most erudite Englishmen had been persuaded that it was all a glorious revolution”
But, why not? It’s not as if it hasn’t happened in these islands before now. The worst is nothing new in the two thousand year story of European politics. During the direst iconoclastic excesses of the Protestant revolution practically every vestige of the old order was eradicated, its history re-written, its music and poetry burned, while its universities and other major deposits of culture were suborned to serve only the interests of the tiny usurping class. So insidious was this defection of what once had for its aim nothing but a search for truth and meaning, so implacable the consequent “reorientation” of the history it was licensed to teach that within a few generations the most erudite Englishmen had been persuaded that it was all a “glorious revolution”. A weird vision had replaced the sweating reality of millions in one accord; an almighty saltus was proposed to bridge all of Europe’s middle history. In medicine, or so it was propagated, men were sickened by a spectral Gallen “stuck in the amber of Grecian antiquity”, philosophy trampled upon reality and common sense, it was claimed. The defensive narrative even insisted that there were no mechanics developing machines or throwing up great bridges, lovely cities, no medicines or herbalists, no composers, no violin makers in Cremona, no farmers keeping stock records, no discovery by Fr. Copernicus that the earth revolved around the sun, (But one and one only pre-Reformation hero is extoled — Galileo, whose hunger for celebrity trumped a few jumpy, over-reacting clerics who had begged him to stop rocking the Barque of Peter at a time when dreadful storms were overtaking it).
In the re-writing of our history there is no consideration of the evolutionary theory of Thomas Aquinas or university studies on terminal velocity, or deliberations well ahead of our own lame limping after Big Bang beginnings (Read Newshawk on this). The mechanical clock had not been invented in this contempt of our immediate past — although it had been ticking away for two hundred years on grandfather’s shelf. Nothing but one and a half thousand years of futility and Faith were supposed to have existed. No, they argued that futility was the fate of Europe because of the Catholic Faith. Then, boom, crump! All real science was unleashed together with real politics and so on. Pierre Duhem the French polymath wrote Le System du Monde to explode this arrant claptrap. He proved if proof were needed that there are no sudden leaps in science, there is no saltus! His work is a must read for any young scholar.
All of that is in dusty history tomes now if you can be bothered to open them, but in the 60s the short-lived Cultural Revolution in modern China is vividly available in Western news media archives, including Google and Utube. The same thing, even more savagely, is being enforced in parts of the Middle East by the sadistic IS forces and recorded for posterity as we write.
“Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold”, as W. B. Yates wrote a year after the first of the recent World War bloodfests. But somehow they raised the banner again for democracy and dragged all the newly grown up peasants into the trenches again. That’s what they said the banner was for; war for democracy. We certainly got ourselves organised again even after the second wave of European slaughter. But there’s the rub! Is our brave new world a democratic world, or is it the stuff of comfortable (so far) State slavery?
But today there are two new threats to our freedom, both of which we must examine closely. The first is the sneaky “implied democracy” in which an elected leader considers that election itself entitles him to act as a totalitarian tyrant. An example would be the claim of the present day Scottish National Party leaderette: “We are a parliamentary democracy!” You’re right! It doesn’t mean a damn thing democratically speaking, save that she believes that, after election, “democracy” exists only for the elected (so long as her elected underlings slavishly follow her party’s line). If the voting population were mature and well advised by the media we should be scared enough. Considering that our media is a foreign owned “tartan wrap around” playing all things to all men in order to attract the maximum readership and profit there’s little chance they would risk a penny for an unpopular fact. Now with all party backing the franchise has been extended to school children whose opinions are as likely to negate the votes of their grown up parents as to magnify them. It’s a lottery rather than a deliberation. When voting is also the burden of little children fear is not the appropriate word. So much for Implied Democracy.
The second sneaky instrument of a usurper is termed Liberal Fascism. A recent study by the American journalist, Jonah Goldberg, entitled Liberal Fascism, is a pretty exhaustive description of this novel threat to democracy.
The strangest thing about this excellent study is the blurb on the back cover. It happens to be spot on and runs thus:
Jonah Goldberg’s excoriating, opinion-dividing US best-seller … destroys long held myths to reveal why the most insidious attempts to control our lives originate from the Left, whether it’s smoking bans or security cameras. Journeying through the history and across culture, he uses surprising examples ranging from Woodrow Wilson’s police state to the Clinton personality cult, the military chic of 60’s student radicals to Hollywood’s totalitarian aesthetics, to show that it is modern progressivism — and not conservatism — that shares the same intellectual roots as fascism.
Published by Penguin, the book is one of Newshawk’s special recommendations. If you fail to read it you will be practically unarmed in the fight for your immediate well-being and the future security of your children. Liberal Fascism is the best kept secret in human history. It is the bed of copulation between industrial capitalism* and the servile State and the birthing couch of a new enslaving monster.
*Industrial capitalism Belloc argued is actually the enemy of dynamic capital based economy because of the largely unlimited loan risk (death grip or mortgage run economies) and unlimited time terms of share ownership.
It is part fulfillment of Hillaire Belloc’s terrible vision back in the nineteen twenties. But smile! It comes in smileys, always smileys as the book’s author insists.
Next edition we take a closer look at Liberal fascism in Great Britain,
Elections are upon us and those of us who know our history and have learned from it are fearful. G. K. Chesterton had a great faith in the wisdom of the common man but I wonder if he, like Alexander Pope, could see him as we do, so firmly hemmed in by powerful menaces and almost starved of truth. Wisdom must be passed on, the media has its part to play. There is no reason why one or another publisher should not at last rouse himself to his moral responsibility. Then, given the full facts, a critical mass of the population awake to the danger will ensure recovery. But in the clamour for wealth courage fails, then certainty, then effort.
In the same poem, “The Second Coming” Yates continued: “The best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity”.
But we’ll get to that next issue when younger readers will be expected to answer all the questions about Democracy; what it is, and what exactly are the democrats who compose it?
We will also spread ourselves somewhat in the wide and proliferating field of Liberal Fascism. We may dare to ask: “Are you a Liberal Fascist?” And, “Is this a good thing or a bad thing?”
Trackback from your site.