Democracy could “work” if it was a democracy of and for and by the right people, but that model is fit only for the Post-Raptorial Republic of Angels. In a non-Utopian world it cannot work because “We the People” is a corrupt mélange of mostly coarse individuals pretending to be Gods. Democracy has duly ruined the remnant of what used to be Christendom. The final stage of the process is proceeding apace: having divorced reason from faith, the West is rapidly sinking into moral, cultural and demographic self-destruction. The Citizen’s self-validating reason guarantees that there are no checks and no balances.
It is not just that monarchy, under a good Christian king, is the best possible form of government—which it is—but that democracy is always a lie, its exact opposite. It is almost as bad, in fact, as monarchy under a bad pagan king. The fruits are the test. The fruits of Hellenic and Roman antiquity, of Byzantium before Manzikert, or those of the West in 12th century, were glorious. The fruits of our “liberal democracy” are poisonous. Its birth in 1789-1793 is the darkest chapter in the history of civilization. The tragedy of 1914 and the end of Christian monarchy in Russia in 1917 were a prelude to the end of all good things everywhere: a sure sign of the withdrawal of Grace from a condemned world. The only bright spot is that millions of Americans and Europeans—let’s call them demoskeptics—are beginning to grasp that the system is evil and dysfunctional, even if they do not understand the roots of its corruption. For helping that sobering process, if for no other reason, Obama’s reelection is not all bad.
30 comments
We Christians aren't backward, oh no.
We just want to see Divine Right brought back, that's all.
Also leeches, plague and exorcisms.
"Democracy could work, but only if people I support are allowed to vote, and only if they vote for someone I support."
So, basically, you're saying that a form of government based on choice could only work of people had no choices...
If your religion can not survive when people are free, your religion is harmful in the first place. When the only way to keep your pseuso-utopia running is by creating a dystopia of oppression and imposition of morality, your religion is a parasite of stupidity.
Oh, yeah, btw - I'm not sure about Americans, but over here in Europe the solution to people abusing democracy generally is not seen as "oh, fuck let's give them control over everything again without them even having to ponder to us" but rather even more democracy. So there's no "waking up" going on, rather we're falling deeper into sleep.
What do you mean by "the right people"? Either it's We the people, or it's a dictatorship. Christianity was never a democracy, and fairly few monarchies have been democracies.
You're wrong, there are checks and balances; they are called the Law and and the Justice system.
The Dark Age Europe was filled with monarchies under "good Christian kings". Ordinary people had no rights whatsoever and were executed for minor offenses. The life expectancy was about half of what it is today, people died of preventable diseases and child-birth. Rather similar to present day third world countries, actually. If you want to live under "good Christian kings", why not move to one of those countries. We won't miss you...
That's strange; most people call the years of 1789 to 1793 "the Enlightenment", the End of Darkness.
The countries in Europe that are most corrupt, are the less democratic ones.
Sweden has a "good Christian king". He doesn't have anything to do with governing the country, though...
Well, think about two things. First, those monarchies in Europe died in a natural way, so maybe it was a clear signal of God that they were not that great. Second, you live in the United States, for some reason, instead of moving to Saudi Arabia. It may mean something too.
Oh, you think an only 'good' society is a monarchy ruled by a good Christian king?
Tell me again why you still live in a nation founded by rebellion and independence from a "good Christian king"...
monarchy, under a good Christian king, is the best possible form of government
Und just how does the judiciary work in that system? Trial by ordeal with divine intervention?
I assume you do realize that if that good Christian king had an even ever so slightly different opinion about God's nature than yours, you'd be burniung at a stake in a jiffy.
Think about it. This evil and dysfunctional system has alölowed you to express your opinion. Go to Saudi Arabia and try it.
Byzantium was plagued with divisions, sectarianism and intrigue. Why do you think the word "byzantine" comes from it? In fact the reason Manzikert WAS a Turkish victory was largely due to the fact that the Byzantines couldn't get their shit together.
Then again, at least the Byzantine empire DID have Christian rulers and I don't know why I'm wasting my time trying to explain shit to someone who thinks Greece and Rome did.
"For helping that sobering process, if for no other reason, Obama’s reelection is not all bad."
And now we see the actual issue, another Obama hater -_-
That's a lot of tripe, even for this sort of president-bashing.
This person seems to be a European-style reactionary, a type I would've thought was comparatively rare in the United States, for historical reasons. (Googling him I see that he's a Serb).
Also; the Greeks had independent city-states, some of which were monarchies, one of which (Athens) had a limited democracy. The Romans had a monarchy, followed by a republic, followed by an empire which retained some republican features.
What happened in 1789, 1848, and 1917, and to that I might also add, 1936 and 1968, were long overdue, inevitable and represent the maturing of Europe, and therefore, western civilization, to a form seen in miniature and imperfectly, in the limited democracy of Athens.
Americans, your native conservatism is in a terrible state if you put up with being lectured to by a Serbian monarchist and would-be aristocrat.
The fruits of Hellenic and Roman antiquity, of Byzantium before Manzikert, or those of the West in 12th century, were glorious.
...And two of those three weren't pagan, huh? News to me. Well, I suppose the Romans were briefly Christian, right at the end there when they started falling apart.
The only bright spot is that millions of Americans and Europeanslet’s call them demoskepticsare beginning to grasp that the system is evil and dysfunctional, even if they do not understand the roots of its corruption. For helping that sobering process, if for no other reason, Obama’s reelection is not all bad.
Delusional. I would say the number of Europeans these days who are sceptical of democracy in general number in the low thousands. They're certainly outnumbered by those who oppose representational democracy, but support other forms such as direct or consensus democracy. If you think anyone but American far-right-fringe lunatics are questioning the validity of democracy over Obama's election , you're wildly ignorant or lying to yourself.
Democracy could “work” if it was a democracy of and for and by the right people,
Democracy could work if it were oligarchy, and therefore not democracy? Startling news, to be sure.
"(Googling him I see that he's a Serb)"
Not only is he a Serb, but an ex-PR man for Radovan Karadzic and one of the chief movers and shakers among Srebrenica denialists. Along with other Serbian nationalists of the extreme right, he looks on the royal dictatorship of Aleksandar Karadjordjevic during the First Yugoslavia as a golden age, a time when the Serbs ruled the rest of Yugoslavia as if it were conquered territory.
Mr. Unpronounceable-Name, societies under old-time monarchies were garbage. The other posters will explain it better. Also, in such a society, why do you assume you'd have any power?
"It is not just that monarchy, under a good Christian king, is the best possible form of governmentwhich it isbut that democracy is always a lie, its exact opposite."
"The fruits of Hellenic and Roman antiquity, of Byzantium before Manzikert, or those of the West in 12th century, were glorious. The fruits of our “liberal democracy” are poisonous. Its birth in 1789-1793 is the darkest chapter in the history of civilization. The tragedy of 1914 and the end of Christian monarchy in Russia in 1917 were a prelude to the end of all good things everywhere: a sure sign of the withdrawal of Grace from a condemned world."
Nobody tell Sodoff Twatcoughick here about the anime series "Code Geass: Lelouch of the Rebellion" then:
image
In an alternate reality, Britain lost the Napoleonic Wars and upped sticks & left the UK (which was assimilated into Europe). But the US lost the War of Independence, and became the Holy Britannian Empire, ruled by the immortal Emperor Charles zi Britannia.
...who possessed the 'Sword of Akasha', a weapon that could destroy gods.
Methinks Sodoff here wouldn't need to be 'Geassed' by Lelouch Lamperouge, to kill himself! >:D
"I am a democrat because I believe that no man or group of men is good enough to be trusted with uncontrolled power over others. And the higher the pretensions of such power, the more dangerous I think it both to rulers and to the subjects. Hence Theocracy is the worst of all governments. If we must have a tyrant a robber barron is far better than an inquisitor. The baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity at some point may be sated; and since he dimly knows he is doing wrong he may possibly repent. But the inquisitor who mistakes his own cruelty and lust of power and fear for the voice of Heaven will torment us infinitely more because he torments us with the approval of his own conscience and his better impulses appear to him as temptations.
And since Theocracy is the worst, the nearer any government approaches to Theocracy the worse it will be. A metaphysic held by the rulers with the force of a religion, is a bad sign. It forbids them, like the inquisitor, to admit any grain of truth or good in their opponents, it abrogates the ordinary rules of morality, and it gives a seemingly high, super-personal sanction to all the very ordinary human passions by which, like other men, the rulers will frequently be actuated. In a word, it forbids wholesome doubt. A political programme can never in reality be more than probably right. We never know all the facts about the present and we can only guess the future. To attach to a party programme whose highest claim is to reasonable prudence the sort of assent which we should reserve for demonstrable theorems, is a kind of intoxication."
- C.S. Lewis on theocracy
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.