Liberals: "Too Much Democracy"

By Douglas V. Gibbs

All tyrannies have one thing in common: Big Government. In oppressive systems, the government is centralized, and wields growing control over the people through various regulations, laws, and dictates. In such a system the political elite come to the decision that individuals are dangerous to the greater good, and they must convince the public to trust the centralized government power, or else devastation could wreak havoc upon the country. The statists rely on rhetorical gimmicks, endlessly repeating that consolidating political power into the hands of the government will serve to save the system, and be beneficial to the public good. Giving into one's own self-interests, the tyrants spew, is a bad thing for the whole, or the collective.

The public good, or "general will," is not necessarily recognized by the people, according to these statists. The general will is presumed to be only known by the ruling elite. But when the people refuse to follow the general will, the statists must abandon getting the public to voluntarily dissolve into a homogeneous mass. At that point, when everything begins to unravel, the totalitarian instinct of liberals reveals itself, and they begin to work to further centralize the government by removing representative institutions, and subjecting the people to regulation and control, in the name of the good of the people, or the general will - as interpreted by the ruling elite.

It is then that individual liberty begins to die.

Sometimes, enough of the citizenry have been so indoctrinated with the deception and lies that they actually applaud the death of freedom.

"So this is how liberty dies. With thunderous applause," Queen Amidala, Star Wars Episode III, Revenge of the Sith

Despotism is the inevitable consequence of consolidated governmental power.

When I refer to liberals, or statists, understand that the reference is not always only to democrats. Liberal socialists, though more concentrated in the democrat party, reside throughout the system. The GOP establishment is full of them, as is many of the members of the precious corps of independents. Some will come straight out and tell you that they are socialist Marxists. Others, like the democrats, will try to hide their intentions, careful not to expose too much or else the people might notice.

As the Obama administration is unraveling, the progressives are exposing who they really are. I've heard the rhetoric of the liberals before. . . behind the walls of the Iron Curtain. The Soviets and the liberals of this nation have a lot in common.

It all begins under the guise of good intentions. They tell you that spanking can no longer be allowed, or that children may only be allowed to eat french fries under supervision. It's all for a good reason, the statists will tell you. Childhood obesity and abuse is out of control. The government must make it all stop with regulations.

In America the statists are working to control energy through bogus environmental claims, control your health by destroying the private health care industry and forcing everyone into a government controlled system, control wealth by taking it away from the achievers through progressive tax rates while outlawing the exchange of items of real value like gold bullion. Besides, they will tell the successful members of society, " There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody! You built a factory out there? Good for you! But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You, uh, were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory and hire someone to protect against this because of the work the rest of us did." (Elizabeth Warren, Harvard Law Professor, Massachusetts Democrat running for Senate, and a former TARP chair)

Apparently, according to Warren, the rich and their employees don't pay taxes for all of those things, only her and "the rest of us" do.

That is classic Marxist thinking. Collectivism. One for all and all for one, otherwise you are a greedy individual who only cares about your self interests. Never mind that your individual success produced jobs, brought products to market, and grew the economy. . . as far as Elizabeth Warren is concerned, you are a pariah on the socialist system she thinks we ought to be governed under.

And now that the Left is destroying the American System, it isn't happening fast enough or thoroughly enough for those Marxist liberals. How dare the Republicans stand in the way of Obama's jobs bill (which isn't a jobs bill, it is a spending bill with more of the same failed crap he's been pedaling since he took office). The democrats say that the Tea Party is standing in the way, and nothing is getting done. Those Tea Party folks, according to the liberals, are obstructionists, and allowing the people to vote these amateurs into office is screwing everything up. . . so, the liberals have decided, let's do away with democracy for a while. Quit letting the people vote. Suspend the elections. Obama already told us that the people don't understand, so it all needs to be left up to the "professional politicians."

They think that only they can understand what is going on, so the people need to be cut out of the equation. Democracy is dangerous, after all, they are screaming, so let's become something else!

How long before they outlaw all opposition parties?

In fact, in an article called "Too Much of a Good Thing" by Peter Orszag of the New Republic, he says we need less democracy. Then, Mr. Orszag butchers a quote by John Adams, completely wrong on the premise, and by doing so literally rewriting history.

Revisionist history seems to be the expertise of the liberals.

Orszag wrote: "In an 1814 letter to John Taylor, John Adams wrote that “there never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” That may read today like an overstatement, but it is certainly true that our democracy finds itself facing a deep challenge: During my recent stint in the Obama administration as director of the Office of Management and Budget, it was clear to me that the country’s political polarization was growing worse—harming Washington’s ability to do the basic, necessary work of governing. If you need confirmation of this, look no further than the recent debt-limit debacle, which clearly showed that we are becoming two nations governed by a single Congress—and that paralyzing gridlock is the result.

"So what to do? To solve the serious problems facing our country, we need to minimize the harm from legislative inertia by relying more on automatic policies and depoliticized commissions for certain policy decisions. In other words, radical as it sounds, we need to counter the gridlock of our political institutions by making them a bit less democratic."

In other words, since the people disagree with what the liberals are trying to do, cut the people out of the equation.

The thing is, he has taken Adams' quote completely out of context. The quote was an argument in support of "republics" over "democracies." Democracies become mob rule. Once the people realize they can vote themselves entitlements, and once the politicians realize they can use promises for more entitlements to get votes, the people wind up voting in tyranny. To guard against such madness, the elections and representation in the United States were set up very differently. Interestingly enough, it was the liberal democrats that changed the system into a more democratic system with the 17th Amendment, and their work to undermine the Electoral College. They love democracy as long as the people vote them in. Now, with the landslide Tea Party win of 2010 looking to be only a pre-shock of what is coming in 2012, suddenly the liberals think democracy is bad.

We are a republic that uses democratic processes. The liberals want it to be pure democracy when it suits them, and a dictatorship with them in charge, otherwise.

They aren't getting enough liberalism passed, reasons Orszag, so the obstacle must be eliminated - and in this case, it is the voice of the people they wish to remove.

But Orszag isn't the only liberal calling for an end to the people's involvement in government. North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue, a raging liberal democrat, suggested that maybe Americans should call off a round or two of elections and let politicians focus on government instead of getting elected. We can't be having all of this partisan gridlock. The Republicans are supposed to just shut up and vote with the democrats - like it or not!

Agree with the democrats, or elections will cease. Don't dare speak out against the democrats, or you will be ridiculed into silence. Eat healthy, or the government will come after you. Ban gasoline engines and asthma inhalers to help the government's environmental agenda, or be attacked for daring to deny the environmental doom the liberals have conjured up. Government health care is coming, and if you don't like it, they will mandate you to participate. Make risky investments and the government will come after you and regulate you. Spank your child, and the government will take your children away without due process - it doesn't matter what your opinion is about spanking. . . if the government says its bad, you better cease and desist. Say anything against the government and you will be called "anti-government." How long before a new Sedition Act is rolled out? How long before dissent becomes criminal? How long before the Tea Party is outlawed?

Obamacare will add 200,000 pages to the Code of Federal Regulations.

As of 1998, there were 134,723 pages of Federal Rules and Regulations. Since Obama took office, the budget for federal regulatory agencies has grown by 16% and employment in regulatory agencies has grown by 13%. Meanwhile, in the private sector, employment has shrunk by 5.6%. The Obama administration has imposed more than 75 major rules during the first couple years of being in office, at a cost via tax dollars of more than $40 billion dollars to the corporations and individuals who have to comply with them.

The democrats have been using the federal agencies to bypass Congress and regulate at will. Recently, the Education Secretary announced he would use regulations to effective end the No Child Left Behind Act. No Child Left Behind was, at best, a horrible law. However, it was passed by Congress and signed by the President. It is up to Congress to change the laws, not a regulatory agency.

According to Senator John Barrasso, another 379 Rules costing the private sector another $9.5 billion went into effect in July.

Regulations are freedom killers, and job busters - and the preferred tool of tyrants the world over.

The liberal left believes there is too much democracy when they are in control - but I guarantee after 2012, when the GOP gains the White House, the Senate, and deepens its control over the House, the democrats will be calling for recounts, and claim that the democratic vote of the people was somehow compromised. Then, they will do all they can to demonize those in office, just like they did to Bush, and Reagan, and every other conservative they can sink their fangs into.

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

Too Much of a Good Thing: Why we need less democracy. - The New Republic

NYC Mayor Bloomberg: 'Government’s Highest Duty' Is to Push 'Healthy' Foods - CNS News

Too Much Democracy? A Modest Proposal From N.C. Gov. Bev Perdue - ABC News

Obama Gives Elizabeth Warren's Socialist Answer to Softball Question - Rush Limbaugh

Corpus Christi mother loses custody of children after spanking toddler - KHOU

Obama: 'Professional Politicians' Understand Debt Crisis Better Than 'The Public' - CNS News

Obama Administration Set to Ban Asthma Inhalers Over Environmental Concerns - The Weekly Standard

The soft road to dictatorship, Increase of Regulatory Agencies - Tea Party Nation

Gold Bullion transactions are illegal for All U.S. citizens - Political Pistachio