Saturday, August 10, 2013

The American Democracy Pitch

By, Chris Rossini

The neocon brothers-in-arms, Senators John McCain & Lindsey Graham, put out a joint Op-Ed in WaPo this morning. They attempt to pitch "Democracy" to the Egyptian people, who ironically just witnessed their first democratically elected President overthrown in a military coup.

The neocon Senators preach:
Our main message in Cairo was simple and straightforward: Democracy is the only viable path to lasting stability, national reconciliation, sustainable economic growth and the return of investment and tourism in Egypt. And democracy means more than elections. It means democratic governance: an inclusive political process in which all Egyptians are free and able to participate, so long as they do so nonviolently; the protection of basic human rights through the rule of law and the constitution; and a state that defends and fosters a vibrant civil society.
I have a different proposal for the Egyptian people, and it's called Liberty.

Now, I realize that the prospects of Liberty breaking out in Egypt are close to zero (after all, we're struggling immensely with the idea catching on here, in the so-called "Land of The Free"). But speaking about Liberty can only help.

First of all, Democracy is only good for the power-hungry (i.e., the worst element of human beings on the planet). It means that they don't have to kill each other to rule over you. The question of "Should someone rule over you with violence?" is out of the question. You will be ruled; just in a way that's more convenient to the ruling classes.

Picture a bunch of ruthless gangs getting together and saying to each another "Hey guys, what are we doing here? Why kill each other to fleece the public? Let's have them choose one of us, and we'll just pass the baton off every few years. We'll all get to live, and if you look over at the U.S., we can still rule every part of a human being's life."

Now let's look at McCain & Graham's buzzwords. Democracy is in fact "viable"...but for the ruling class. Civilization, private property, and free markets die a very slow and drawn-out death.

What about "national reconciliation"? That's nonsense. If you look at the U.S., you'll notice never ending battles by groups voting themselves free stuff at the expense of their fellow man. Base human instincts take over. The drive to get "something for nothing" becomes irresistible.

The last thing you'll find in the U.S. is reconciliation. Instead, the debasement of voluntary association has reached the point where some (many?) believe they have a "right" to medical care and something called a "living wage".

How about "sustainable economic growth"? Democracy kills that as well. In the U.S. we have a boom/bust extravaganza every several years. Our economy is centrally planned by people sitting in marble palaces. They manipulate our money and economic transactions down to the finest minutia. We need licenses to do just about anything, and have to jump through an alphabet soup of regulatory agencies to make even the simplest decisions.

What about "an inclusive political process in which all Egyptians are free and able to participate, so long as they do so nonviolently". Again, that's good for the rulers only. Americans could easily ask the following questions:
  • What if I don't want to participate? Where do I cash out?
  • What if I don't want to use government to steal from others, or have them use government to steal from me?
  • What if I want to use sound money like gold & silver?
  • What if I don't want my earnings used to subsidize politically-connected businesses?
  • What if I don't want my earnings used to bail out the banking "system"?
  • What if I don't want my earnings used to build bombs that kill innocents in other countries?
McCain & Graham would surely respond by saying: "You ask too many questions."

Does Democracy create "the protection of basic human rights through the rule of law and the constitution"? Heck no!! Every Egyptian can read the U.S. Constitution online and then take a look at the reality...The government isn't even in the same universe.

And finally, does Democracy create "a state that defends and fosters a vibrant civil society"? The answer is: of course not! Because democracy slowly erodes private property, free markets, and civilization itself, violence logically moves in and fills the vacuum.

A people who operate on the "something for nothing" mentality don't have to jump too far mentally to "act like the government" themselves, and just cut out the middle man.

American cities have, over time, degraded into cesspools. The "bad parts" that you have to "stay away from", have gotten bigger and bigger. And the suburbs will surely follow once the central bank's inflation rapidly escalates.

So to the Egyptian people: Don't believe the Democracy hype...especially from a bunch of neocon warmongers.

Only liberty, free markets, private property, and sound money will save you. And it's the only thing that will save Americans as well.

Follow @ChrisRossini


  1. They also have done their best to push amnesty for millions of new welfare receipients and dem voters who will put the final nail in the coffin of any chance of liberty spreading. I wish libertarians besides hoppe would discuss this.

    1. Not at all. Those millions are coming because they want a better life than provided in their dirt poor countries though corruption and piss poor property rights. None of those people come to the US to catch crumbs in Detroit.
      There is no road to Hans's festung libertarianism.

    2. I imagined the EPJ would be the last place I'd have to deal with a blatant non sequitur just before retiring for the night. Anonymous writes about the PTB's desire for additional mouths at the public teat which will keep them in power. This perspective is valid and worthy of discussion.

      Then, Heath, for reasons known only to Heath, decides to post a reply which is not a reply at all but a complete change in perspective. Rather than addressing the point Anonymous raised, Heath raises a different point which is also worthy of discussion.

      The difference in perspective appears to me to be Heath's notion that "a better life" is something that is "provided." Ah, herein lies the rub. If the problem is "Those millions..." who are coming here expecting to be "provided" a better life than they were "provided" in their home country, then Anonymous' "nail in the coffin" just got hammered in. Hammered because the providing appears to have as part of the equation, the expectation of a coercive transfer of property to "Those millions..."

      The "American Dream," much to the chagrin of the real estate and mortgage industries who usurped the phrase for their marketing purposes, is the notion that each generation can improve its economic position through hard work, creativity, and perseverance. We have no caste system here. We are equally tasked with bootstrapping ourselves to the economic level we desire. There was never included in the original plan anything like "a better life...provided."

      As Andrew J. Galambos preached: When the state provides someone, by coercion, with what belongs to someone else, the First Law of Thermodynamics has been violated. You can't get something for nothing.

      I welcome anyone who desires to come to this country to better themselves and the only sign that should be posted at the border should read: "Everyone makes their own living here. There is no free lunch. As long as you understand that you will not be provided with any good or service for which you cannot pay, you are welcomed to enter."

      Anonymous, you do, in fact, raise a valid point. Heath, you missed it. Mr. Rossini, on the other hand, nailed it. (Pun intended. Sorry, couldn't help myself.)

    3. You really got hung up on that 'provided' didn't you? I followed the tangent that anonymous opened with Hoppe's discussion of a nation being an estate being owned and people slinking in over the border, effectively trespassing.
      Unfortunately Mr Galambos, you can get something for nothing (at the present time) with a politician in charge cos physics isn't.

    4. Heath, you got schooled. It happens - accept it and move on. Your changing of the subject and shifting blame to the dictator de jour do not bolster your argument.

    5. Heath, are you seriously trying to argue that a group of people who are consistent votes for the welfare state while taking full advantage of the welfare programs that we taxpayers provide is not a liberty related issue? I have a great deal of experience with Hispanic illegals and they are honestly good people but when they are told from families and friends to take food stamps and ssi and Medicaid and use the ER as a personal dr without ever intending to pay a cent, do you not see how that dramatically increases the costs of the welfare state, as well as the voting block for it to expand?

      There is a reason Schumer, Feinstein, Obama, Pelosi, Reid, etc all are pushing so hard for amnesty. If these were people who did not help expand the welfare state, would a bunch of fascist politicians try so hard to push for their legalization? If they are eastern euro types, for instance, who tend to be far more libertarian than any other immigrant group, I can guarantee you that none of the elites or dema who also push the police state, war, gun bans, obamacare, etc would be doing it.

    6. I also should add that if it were not for the welfare state, then I would not care about immigration. But what do libertarians always point out about what welfare did to the American Indians and blacks? It destroyed their families, wealth, and morality - while making them forever dependent on the state and reliable voting blocks for big govt. since our own govt runs ads encouraging illegals to take food stamps, what do you think is going to happen in the future? Detroit is what our entire nation will look like as the welfare state bankrupts us all.

    7. Can wenzel or Chris address this with a blog post? The whole illegal immigrant issue and how it affects the welfare state?

    8. Anonymous, as far as I can tell you have done an excellent job addressing this subject. We also have seen it touched upon here and there in other posts here. I'm not sure what more might be said although it would undoubtedly be instructive if Messrs Wenzel and/or Rossini made comment.

      Regarding Mr. Heath, we've pounced on him sufficiently hard when his post may have been made in haste without full purpose of thought. It's easy to do. I also have a feeling that he's never read Thrust For Freedom let alone Sic Itur Ad Astra. Understandable, not many have. Therefore, my reference to Mr. Galambos' and his explanation regarding the First Law of Thermodynamics as the foundation for the idea that you can't get something for nothing, would be lost on Mr Heath.

      I continue to be grateful for this blog and the efforts Mr. Wenzel applies to it. So many contributors have widened my horizons of thought that I can only provide a blanket "Thank You" to all. I can only hope Mr. Heath continues to read and be similarly widened.

  2. Only liberty, free markets, private property, and sound money will save you??

    What happened to Zombi Jesus? According to Gary North, only Zombi Jesus can save you.