Modern politics is based on voters being fundamentally corrupt. They are for sale for any financial or fiscal benefit to their group, gender or profession. In their programs the rivalling political parties call it "fair distribution" and all modern voters believe that this is what democracy is all about - a perpetual game of gaining economic advantages at the expense of other voters.
The individual voter has no benefit from spending many hours familiarizing himself with politics. His vote does not count any more than thousands of other voters', who vote quite thoughtlessly and randomly.
The individual will think deeply about problems that concern him personally and that he believes he can influence. But problems, the solution of which is beyond his reach, he will not think about. He just wants to follow the common opinion because he subconsciously feels that it will be beneficial for his life and career. This leads to the fact that once an attitude has gained momentum and gained a foothold in the minds of the people, it will be almost unstoppable, regardless of how absurd and harmful it is.
1. Democracy is merely a tool
Listening to politicians' speeches, one might get the notion that democracy is a new state religion, which has replaced Christianity. The former Danish prime minister Helle Thorning spoke typically not so much about, what was good for Denmark, but about what was good for "our democracy". Politicians highlight rather that their proposals are beneficial to democracy than that they are beneficial to Denmark. But the intent of democracy must be the simple that you think it is a kind of tool, a practical system to identify the right leaders and take the right decisions for the benefit of the whole people's prosperity and freedom and the nation's future existence.
So-called Danish Muslims on the march. Photo Uriasposten
But today it is clear that precisely the democratic system has been an important cause of disastrous mistakes. The voters' majority has voted for politicians, who have allowed the immigration of hundreds of thousands of indigestible Muslims, who intend to take over the country when they become numerous enough.
After all, it is very clear that this problem can only be solved by sending the muslims back to countries that have the culture and the religion that they love so much, close the mosques and ban the Koran. It is easy to realize purely logically, but emotionally incomprehensible for the vast majority of voters, who yearn to be good and fear confrontation and unrest.
The politicians tell the conflict-averse voters what they want to hear in order to win their votes, even though the message is unrealistic. "The immigrants will become like the rest of us, they just have to integrate, it gets better day by day, we only have to show understanding for their special culture".
Therefore the politicians tell us after every terrorist attack that we should "Simply continue our daily lives as usual, because otherwise, the terrorists have won" - Put another way: we should simply pretend nothing had happened, then problems will most likely disappear by themselves - which is what the vast majority of anxious voters want to hear.
2. Voters are not qualified
Voters make decisions of the most vital importance to the nation without the necessary basic knowledge; they are not qualified decision makers. The overwhelming majority of voters in the modern mass-democracy has nothing or a very superficial knowledge of economics, diplomacy, military tactics and strategy - indeed, in modern times, they do not even know their own nation's history and cultural identity. This corresponds to a doctor performing brain surgery without knowing even basic anatomy.
Winston Churchill said: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with an average voter"
The American stand-up comedian George Carlin said the famous: "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups". From Whistleblower Newswire.
Well over 90% of the electorate only take a passing and superficial interest in the nation's problems. They are more loyal to their favorite brand of beer or football club than to any political party.
Objectively speaking, large groups of voters have effectively disqualified themselves as serious decision makers by expressing support for such absurd nonsense as the optional and interchangeable 72 genders and the end of the world due to a marginal increase in the four ten thousandths of CO2 in the atmosphere.
The majority of voters cast their votes guided by fleeting likes and dislikes with the personality, gender and appearance of the candidates. They vote for different parties from election to election - but it helps just the same.
Further, some voters have problems with motivation. They are not at all supporters of the nation that they have been entrusted to look after with their voting right. We have set the fox to look after the geese. Young politically correct people may think that the old-fashioned nations, including Denmark, should be abolished, and the areas should be put under some form of European or world government. The thousands of Muslims whom the politicians have also given the right to vote will also abolish this infidel nation, Denmark, and place the area under a worldwide caliphate.
All this is the very nature of democracy and means that the winners of the elections will not be those who are the best at solving the nation's problems; but they will most frequently be candidates who are able to sense a passing feeling of something common to large groups of voters. They are experts in saying what the voters want to hear.
Of course we can criticize such politicians and their voters, but it is not their own fault - so to speak - because that is how it has always been.
Typical politicians are created and fostered by the modern political system - it is not the reverse. Plato described that time politicians, the sophists, and we recognize the modern politicians.
He compared the people, the voters, with a large and powerful animal, which was cared for, nurtured and fed by the politicians: "Further, I would have you consider that the hireling Sophist only gives back to the world their own opinions; he is the keeper of the monster, who knows how to flatter or anger it and observes the meaning of his inarticulate grunts. Good is, what pleases him, evil what he dislikes; truth and beauty are determined only by the taste of the brute. Such is the Sophist's wisdom, and such is the condition of those, who make public opinion the test of truth, whether in art or in morals." (The Republic)
A scene from the Peloponnesian war on a Greek vase. Thucydides was contemporary with Plato. He wrote the history of the Peloponnesian war. Thomas Hobbes and many others believe that his clear message was that Athens lost the war because it was a democracy. The voters of Athens proved to easy to excite for unwise actions that led to unnecessary losses and defeats.
We realize that one of Plato's arguments against democracy is that he believes that "truth and beauty" are objective values that cannot be defined by voting.
When one on an election day sees that after the first 20% of the votes are counted, the final result can be predicted with good statistical certainty, so you can feel that the mass of voters really is a big and strong animal that reacts predictably to certain stimulations and irritations. And the politicians are its keepers, who are experts in the habits and behaviors of the animal.
3. Voters' rational ignorance
The voters' rational ignorance describes that they deliberately do not want to get acquainted with the political problems, because this will require costs in time and effort, while individual's benefits of his efforts in practice will be zero.
Voters' rational ignorance
Moreover, a voter, who has spent many hours to get acquainted with the problems, may on the election night experience being run over by millions of ignorant voters, whose votes count just as much as his, and that will make him frustrated. He will think that it is better to take it quite calmly and keep an ironic distance to the whole political circus.
One would think that if all voters really consciously chose to be relatively ignorant of the nation's problems, democracy would create terrible results - and looking around in Mjoelner Park, Gellerup Park, Wolls Mose and similar Muslim parallel societies, which have been created on the basis of such democratic decisions, one must acknowledge that it is actually the case.
Teachers and authorities constantly encourage citizens to keep up with politics, so that democracy can work. But they work against the wind: it is truly an inherent feature of the modern democratic system that individuals are motivated not to spend time on issues concerning the nation's management.
Voters' rational ignorance. From Le Quebecois Libre.
The concept of rational ignorance was introduced by Anthony Downs in 1957: "It is irrational (for individuals) to be politically informed because the low return from data simply does not justify their costs in time and other resources."
The logic is simple. Time is money, and it takes time to acquire information also about political issues. The individual's benefit from his political efforts will in practice be zero, and therefore the rational selfish individuals prefer to spend their time and energy on something else that is more related to their own lives and careers.
4. Democracy and welfare make voters corrupt
Politicians lure voters with benefits at the expense of others. Photo Ola Betiku.
Corruption means that people who have been entrusted with control of someone else's money are acting for their own personal benefit.
The combination of welfare state and democracy makes all voters corrupt. The political game goes very much that all groups seek to achieve economic benefits at the expense of other groups. In the democratic state, there are no limits to how far the state can penetrate into the individuals' economy. In theory, everything can be taxed, the only limitation is the practical possibilities for checking that taxpayers really pay.
Democracy has always been associated with that everyone owns each other's property and can tax it and confiscate it after the majority's decisions. æschines was a politician from Athens, one of the contemporaries of Plato and Socrates. In connection with a mention of such taxes and confiscations, he gives the following comment: "The Athenians come out of Ecclesia (Athens People's Assembly), not as they come from a political assembly, but if they come from a business meeting in which the profit has been distributed."
"Welfare for all". Politics in the modern mass democracy is much about to gain advantages at the expense of others. Photo Allan Ohms.
All groups in modern mass democracy maneuver and position themselves to gain economic advantage at the expense of others. The political left wants "the rich" to pay, students want higher SU, parents want free kindergartens, pensioners want higher pension checks, and so the game continues back and forth ad infinitum.
Modern political parties have learned from the social democrats. They will give financial benefits to broad groups that represent many votes, and under various pretexts they will collect the necessary funds from isolated groups that do not represent many votes. In doing so, they want to achieve a net vote gain, which can form the basis for their continued careers.
5. Voters' irrationality
"Reason is, and should be, only the slave of the passions", wrote David Hume. Presumably, most voters unconsciously form their rational political views motivated by their feelings, which we must believe is basically love of country.
But there are other feelings than patriotism. Women use the act of suffrage as a weapon against the enemy of feminism, the evil white men; they go to the polls determined to show them that they should have to decide everything! Left-leaning voters use the act of voting to target the rich. All men rival for women's love, and male voters may feel an unconscious dislike for a candidate, who is a man in his prime - because he is a rival.
Tens of thousands irrational Swedish voters gathered for "kærleksmanifestation" on Sergels Torg in Stockholm exactly two days after a Muslim terrorist killed four and wounded at least fifteen in the Drottninggatan pedestrian street quite nearby. Photo Snaphanen.dk.
Ordinary voters are anxious; they dearly wish that everything will continue as it always has done. That's why it is so effective to stamp political opponents as far right or left. Most voters are ready to accept any argument, telling them that everything will remain as before, no matter how bad and illogical it is.
If one imagines that in 1944 or the spring of 1945 there had been a referendum on whether or not there should be a resistance struggle or not, then there would have been a safe majority to reject the resistance struggle, because the majority of the population did not want violence and trouble.
Everyone is responsible for oneself first. If you don't care about yourself, why should others care? It is not selfishness to be able to take care of oneself, as it is a prerequisite for being able to help others.
The individual can be an excellent decision-maker in everything that concerns his private life, finances and career, but when it comes to political choices, he will often decide impulsively without deeper rational considerations - because he does not believe that it will directly affect his career and private life. He may unconsciously note whether the candidate seems likable and whether he says the right things that he has heard before at school and in the media.
The rational voter is a myth. From Woodgate's View - The Irrational Voter - drawing by Dan Berger.
Descartes wrote: "For it seemed to me that I could find much more truth in the reasonings that each person makes concerning matters that are important to him, and whose outcome ought to cost him dearly later on if he judged badly than in those reasonings engaged in by a man of letters in his study, which touch on speculations that produce no effect and are of no other consequence to him except perhaps that, the more they are removed from common sense, the more pride he will take in them."
The individual will think deeply about problems that concern him personally and that he believes he can influence. But problems, the solution of which is beyond his reach, he will not consider further. He simply wants to follow the common opinion because he unconsciously feels that it will be beneficial to his life and career.
This means that if an attitude has gained momentum and got a foothold in popular debates, it will be almost unstoppable with democratic means, no matter how absurd and harmful it is. The comprehensive support for Islamic immigration, feminism and the worldwide idea that humans are responsible for the climate of the planet are good examples. When such a case first rolls, it will suck up everything like a rolling snowball. Media, teachers, politicians, artists and actors, all who make their living by being popular, as well as women and young people seeking opposition, all wish to acquire the correct attitudes of the future.
About to get a job or not depends a lot on whether you know someone, who knows someone; And therefore it is necessary to participate in different groups. If you want to meet a woman that you want to live with, you must have a form of social circle, where she can be found. In general, we can only be happy for a long time, when we are connected to a community - which almost always - formally or informally - is connected with common religion, political attitude, worldview or ideas about human nature or the like.
Many held out for many years in the Communist Party loyal to Moscow, although it soon became clear that the theory could not be true - because you do not let down your comrades.
Tens of thousands of irrational Swedish voters gathered for a "Kärleksmanifestation" at Sergels Torg in Stockholm showing a big red love heart exactly two days after a Muslim terrorist killed four and injured many more. As you can see, it's not just young girls. They are desperate to avoid a violent confrontation that seems inevitable.
The 72 optional genders, the belief in the evil CO2 and the belief in the evil of the white man are irrational positions, in fact modern religions.
Modern empirical research suggests that religious people consistently enjoy greater satisfaction with their lives than others. It is no wonder that people protect their irrational beliefs and attitudes toward criticism and cling to them if counter arguments should have seeped through their defenses.
6. The media manipulate
Newspapers and TV stations are the key to political power in modern mass democracy, they have a patent on the truth.
For the majority of voters, the decision on which candidate to vote for is a kind of intellectual left-hand work; it is not something that they give many and deep thoughts - and therefore they are easily influenced by the media that have more specific ideas about what they should think.
Democracy theorists believe that it is no problem that 98% of voters are unqualified, corrupted and irrational decision makers. For when they vote completely by random - like when you flip a coin - their votes will in the long run amount to 49% for and 49% against in all questions. The remaining 2%, who are the qualified and rational voters, will then decide the matters, thereby ensuring that democracy works for its purpose and makes the right decisions.
The Danish School of Journalism has made a distinctly left-wing extremist video with the aim of recruiting new students. Violent demonstrations, fights with police and violation of rules are key components of the video call to be a journalist. The first scene shows a hooded demonstrator with a torch in hand, while you hear a police siren. Then they simply have envisioned the type of future journalist. The video speaks confidentially to the young people, who are doing this kind: "To you, who know the rules in order to break them" - Photo Den Korte Avis.
It may sound convincing, but there is a snake in Paradise. The vast majority of the unqualified and irrational voters do not form their opinions at random, they get them from the media. They sit faithfully on the couch in semi-darkness in front of the television and watch the news that the journalists think it is good for them to see. And media and journalists are not objective. It has been demonstrated many times that journalists' political attitudes lie far to the left of the ordinary voters'. They have the attitude complex that is called political correctness.
One might think that journalists are professionals and do not let their personal opinions influence their work, but it is easy to see that this is not the case. The media keeps the climate pot boiling with dramatic reports of floods and wildfires, and does not let the readers and viewers forget that the end of the world is near. The news is full of stories about successful women and evil white men. In every nature program on TV, they will say in a subdued voice towards the end of the program that the future looks bleak for the animal, fish or plant in question due to upcoming climate changes.
7. Schools and colleges brainwash
Most very young voters also do not vote randomly but influenced by the politically correct attitudes that they have got in schools and universities.
It's easy to brainwash children and young people. It happens everywhere in the world.
Left: Young Chinese praise Mao with the little red book in hand. Photo China Australia Consult.
Middle: Young Arabs from Gaza in Hamas training camp are preparing for the attack on Isræl and the Jews. Photo Breitbart screenshot.
Right: Young brainwashed Danes in demonstration in Malmoe for political correctness. "Never again macho pigs". Foto Uriasposten.
All the young women that the author has known in his life, who have completed studies as teachers, have come out from the study after a few years as convinced politically correct. They considered feminism as a matter of course, to love one's country as abominable nationalism, all asylum seekers they considered to be noble natives, on whom you should have compassion. White men should be ashamed of the evils of imperialism, loving our own people is racism and so on.
Candidates from the teachers' universities carry these attitudes on to the children in public primary schools that are being indoctrinated with the politically correct values. Therefore, young voters coming directly from school are usually very politically correct.
Posters and Grafitti in Classroom in the Free High School on Noerrebro in Copenhagen. Photo Uriasposten.
As one of his first actions as the first consul, Napoleon took control of the schools. "In the schools, it is my main goal to have a mean of directing the political and moral opinion," he said. "For as long as people as children are not being told, whether they should be republicans or monarchists, Catholics or atheists, so long the state will not be one nation." Napoleon had no ideas about cultural and racial diversity.
Napoleon was right. It must be quite natural for a nation to influence future generations with the nation's fundamental values. Only the modern advocates of political correctness in universities, schools and other educational institutions have taken the right to define the values themselves on behalf of the nation, thus influencing the young people in a particular political direction. In addition, the value complex "political correctness" is suicidal for a nation.
It is needless to say that the journalism school is among the most politically correct education institutions in the country.
8. Between dictatorship and the modern mass democracy
Winston Churchill said in a speech in parliament in November 1947: "Many forms of government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Christian IV with the national council. During his long and in the end disastrous reign, he was in constant in-fight with the council, who were opponents of his wars, especially the one in Germany. The king won - to the detriment of Denmark. His son Frederik III introduced absolute monarchy with a coup. This continued Denmark's historical decline, that particularly Christian IV had begun in his late years. Drawing from Glossarium Juridico-Danico. .
We must fear that with the current mass democracy the European nations will be paralyzed, and they will not be able to shake off the muslim stranglehold on them. It will all go under in "love manifestations", peace marches, calls for increased integration and tolerance, statements that we must continue doing, as we usually do, and similar toothless actions, as we know them so well.
It is quite clear that pure autocracy or dictatorship nor are good systems. The Danish absolute monarchs have a great responsibility for the country's decline from a respected power to a small insignificant European state. The dictator Adolf Hitler started in a dazzling way to overthrow the Treaty of Versailles and restore Germany's economy, but he lost touch with reality and brought disaster to the German people. Mao Zedong was a skilled guerrilla general, but later he destroyed Chinas economy and culture with his big leap forward and cultural revolution, costing the lives of millions.
Sovereigns work best when they are constantly looked over the shoulder and evaluated by well-qualified persons. The English Magna Carta of 1215 and the Danish king Erik Klipping's charter on the Danehof in 1282, we consider as the beginning of democracy. Here groups of perhaps perhaps 25-30 barons and great men, who had the right and duty to look the ruler over his shoulder and intervene in case of irregularities, had responsibility.
The age development of the right to vote in Denmark - Wikipedia.
In the Danish constitution of 1849, only unpunished and economic independent men over 30 had the right to vote to parliament. Only in connection with the constitutional amendment in 1915 servants and other employees got the right to vote. In 1908 women were given the right to vote. The electoral age was steadily lowered from the 30 years in 1849 to the present 18 years.
Women live in their feelings and dreams, and they are the foundation of political correctness. The greatest disaster for the peoples of Europe was that young women were given the right to vote.
The Danish Youth Council recommends 16 years old's right of voting: "If young people can vote, they will mature, and they will want to participate in democracy." The left-wing newspaper, Information, believes that young people have a kind of human right to vote: "Why should Danish youth be placed democratically inferior to other European youth?" A professor at Aalborg University, Johannes Andersen, also believes that the right to vote will mature and educate the young people - apparently, he believes that there is a need for it: "It will be the improvement of our democracy, alone by the fact that more would be a part of it." There is no mention of what qualifications the young people should have, and what they may contribute.
The Danish left-wing political parties, Socialist People's Party, The Radical Left, The Unity List, the Alternative and many Social Democrats - including Mogens Lykketoft and Helle Thorning - are supporters of 16 years right to vote. It is easy to see that this would dilute the modern mass democracy further to a mere joke, and it will probably destroy itself shortly after. The newly appointed voters will be even more politically correct than the slightly older teenagers, who already have voting rights; Moreover, they will be even easier for journalists and teachers to manipulate.
Front page picture of The Myth of the Rational Voter by Bryan Caplan.
In fact, the more immature, ignorant, irrational and unmotivated voters, who are involved in democracy, the less democratic it will be; Because it will make it even easier for media, teachers, career politicians and international manipulators to control Plato's voter-animal.
A limited company's board of directors is not elected by the company's office helpers, night shifts and toilet guards, it is maned with such members, who have relevant experience, knowledge of management and the company's business and financial or personal interest in the company's existence. In modern times, it happens very rarely that a really large shareholder company goes bankrupt, indicating that it is a good system. An experienced - though few in numbers - management can keep an organization on track with the general overall decisions.
We can send a thought to the early danish developers and contractors, for example, brewer J.C. Jacobsen, who founded Carlsberg, A.P. Moller, who founded the shipping line, and C.F. Tietgen, who founded Danisco and many other companies. Together with the other business owners of the time they were very national minded and wanted their companies to benefit Denmark. They could have been candidates for some sort of national council if they had still existed.
However, today's danish listed public limited companies are owned by a host of rapidly changing international investors, who have no special interest in Denmark. The management is only responsible to shareholders and has only one objective: to increase shareholder wealth.
In ancient Athens, only free men who had undergone the military training had the right to vote.
One of the author's friends has suggested that the nation's political leadership could be improved by that only persons who have an office, which means they are managers of a certain number of employees, should have the right to vote. The point is that men and women, who are used to being responsible for others, will take their voting rights more seriously, while at the same time they will be better qualified than others.
