Subject: Political Questions Resolved

Date: 22 Jan 1997 00:00:00 GMT

From: "Myrkury" <>

Organization: voicenet bad advertises itself if i leave this field blank

Newsgroups:,, alt.slack



Hey Odell and Co., listen up you numbnutz I'm about to provide you with

some stuff you can copy and seem smartz if you quote it ok.


"How does tyranny arise? That it comes out of democracy is fairly clear.

Does the change take place in the same sort of way as the change from

oligarchy to democracy? Oligarchy was established by men with a certain

aim in life; the good they sought was wealth, and it was the insatiable

appetite for money making to the neglect of everything else that proved

its undoing. Is democracy likewise ruined by greed for what it conceives

to be the supreme good?"


Paraphrase of Plato in Republic VII:562


"What is Democracy?:


Believing what we're told

Justice by numbers

A close shave

Everything all the time

The virtue that makes small

Liberal bourgeoisie

365 days till Xmass

The myth of mental illness

What is bureaucracy


Rampant pederasty

Egalitarian mythology

Bad women

Forced integration

Mandatory miscegenation

Armed beggars

Paid voting armies

Biding your time"


A pamphlet from "EXIT"


That's right fools, democracy sucks. It is in fact the cause of

dictatorship. Now the ol' US of A used to be a Republic, which was a form

of oligarchy. And this worked fine when only landed white men could vote.

But them Federalists got greedy, they wanted more then their fair share

of the largesse, so in order to do an end run around Jefferson's

Republicans they kept expanding the voter base. Eventually this

disenfranchisement of the landed Southern oligarchy led them into conflict

with the new Republican's concept of democracy. These new Republicans,

Lincoln for one, sought to further concentrate their power by means of

expanding full citizenship to as many people as possible. They did this,

not from altruism, but because they understood that the larger the

efranchised body of a polity is, the easier it is to controll by

serrupticious means.

Eventually the southern oligarchy cut a deal with the northern

"democracy," you might remember this as the end of reconstruction. This

led to a period of power sharing. This seemed to be a stable system until

it began to be pressured by those who sought to rise into power by

exploiting the naivite of the poor masses, Eugene Debbs for example. In

response the northern elites which controlled the "democratic" process

coopted the socialist rhetoric of the left and transformed it into the

progressive policies of Teddy Roosevelt. Again the south was left to its

own devices, but in the north the urban poor and women were brought into

the fold of the enfranchised citizenry in order to maintain the controll

of the elites.

But the Republicans had to give too much away in order to maintain their

ruling bloc. The fiscal sops used to maintain the allegiance of the upper

middle class were so irresponsible that the great depression resulted.

Onto this stage the old oligarchy made its return. The southerners knew

that they could never put one of their own in charge so they found the

perfect front man. FDR and his sponsors realized that the masses would

gladly accept an exchange of full citizenship for a job and food. This

was accomplished by setting up "patronage" systems in northern urban

centeres that resembled the southern plantation system. Instead of a

Massa, the masses were beholden to a "boss". Instead of picking cotton

they had to vote for the boss' candidate. Now this was unlike the

patronage of the past where work or favors were exchanged for government

jobs. This was cash in the form of welfare exchanged for votes.

This worked fine for a while and even aided the southern oligarchs

because it allowed them to begin a conversion to an industrail economy by

taking some of the pressure off of them to provide direct support for the

masses temporarily displaced by economic conversion.

Now this pissed the Republicans off something fierce. Not only were the

northern elites displaced from power but they had been victimized by the

same methods they had used to seize power ages ago. But they had one

advantage..the liberal bourgeoisie bleeding hearts which had been weighing

them down defected to the Democrats, the new party of the poor and

downtrodden. So what did the Republicans do? they adopted a policy of

reaction, promoting fear of the masses. They told Americans that they as

individuals were middle class and that they needed protection from the

poor. This was accomplised through "tough on socialism, tough on crime"

propaganda. This approach failed for a while until the liberals seized

controll of the Democrats by means of the "civil rights/guilt assuagement"

movement and the "anti-vietnam" movement. This led to a Republican return

to power on the national level though the Democrats patronage system

allowed them to retain congress. But the republicans were intellectually

bankrupt. They had abandoned their progressive system to the democrats

and couldn't maintain the levels of fear necessary to sustain power. So

they came up with supply side economics. a populist sop and a one time

payout to the rich. They came up with the war on drugs to replace the

commies and provide a new patronage structure. If you doubt this read up

on the "Partnership for a Drug-free America" it is a cash handout to a

bunch of bogus anti-drug efforts.

The Republicans ran into their same dead end once again though. They

could not afford to placate the masses and make the payouts to their elite

backers. So they had a recession and the Democrats came back into office

on their traditional platform, but they too could not afford the payoffs

so they lost congress.


So what does this mean? This means that:


The US was an oligarchy at its birth. Competing elites used

"democratization" as a tool in their power struggle, not as an end in

itself. Both elites gave away too much and in order to maintain control

they found themselves giving away so much that it was in fact

counterproductive to the goals of the oligarchy. So there is no going

back to that model. What is next for the USA? True democracy, where

equality is enforced and mediocraty is the highest ideal. Now this is a

terrible possiblity. The old oligarchy is, trying to save us by returning

to real power in an attempt to save this nation from the evils of

democracy. Unfortunately the class based models of the Democrats and the

Republicans are bankrupt. But there are new paradimes on the horizon.

The republicans are trying to use the old "you are a part of the majority

and we will protect you from the minorities" scam in the context of

lifestyles by dealing with the religious fundamentalists and nativists.

The Democrats are trying the old "we will protect you" scam by defining

the world as such a complex place that the nation needs to have descisions

made for it by an elite of the "informed."


So we have the options of:


1. A true democracy..which nobody wants.

2. Tyranny..which nobody wants (except the tyrant)

3. A Republican Theocratic Republic..which ain't bad unless you are not a

Christian .

4. A Democratic Oligarchy of the Intelligensia..which aint bad unless you

like to make up your own mind and didn't go to an elite Ivy league school.


So in summary I have a great deal of hope for this country. My dream is

that on July 5, 1998 the saucers will come and kill enough people that

those who remain are few enough in number to just get along cause they all

know each other socially.



If you think you understand what I just said, you are a fool.

If you understand what I just said you are an idiot.