Illegitimate Democracies – Third Point Of The Mont Order
What is so special about “democracy” and “Western values” that it is worth committing such horrific atrocities and war crimes for these ideas? In the short time that they have dominated this century so far, the “democracies” have started more wars than anyone else.
They have kicked doors down, machine-gunned civilians and inflicted starvation on entire populations with economic sanctions. The “democracies” have ravaged and destroyed Libya in military aggression, and today wage new wars of occupation and regime change against a conspicuous number of different states. They cause so much suffering that anyone proud of “the West” and “democracy” today is as good as cancer. No ideology has attacked so many defenseless countries since the years of European fascism.
A person with anti-colonialist credentials must necessarily be skeptical of most so-called democratic regimes today. Frequently, the establishment of democracy is nothing but an idol, used as an excuse to bomb weaker states without effective technological means of governance or self-defense. It is a facade, as asserted in the third point of the new October code of the Mont Order society.
The root of this cancerous false belief that sentences whole countries to death is a critical error in ideology. Let us consider it. Liberal democracy is often declared as the best system of government in the world, the “end of history” according to neoconservative (neocon) ideology. Although this claim does have an apparent historical basis, it dismisses the other essential pillar of stable modern states, which is popular sovereignty. Popular sovereignty requires that communities get a chance to decide their own political future, rather than having it imposed on them by outsiders convinced of their superiority.
In the American and French revolutions, the first governments came to power based on models of modern sovereign democratic republics. Since that event, most liberal democracies have been copycat states modeled primarily on France. The British regime does not even qualify to go in this category, since it is a monarchy ruled still by politicians bred from the First Estate – that minority of brats who inherit their property and status rather than earning it.
But if we take a sober look at all the Western governments, it is clear that none of them are democratic, and what democratic features do exist are despised and subverted by the elected lawmakers. The only way of telling a “Western democracy” apart from any dictatorship is the use of elections to nod in the next group of wealthy oligarchs. Such elections have no impact on the state’s policies, which roll on according to designs predating the incumbent government. When an “elected” government disagrees with the public, the ruler simply dismisses public opinion or even accuses the public of being terrorists and traitors, as the British Prime Minister regularly does.
As the Mont Order information-sharing society acknowledged in the already mentioned third point of its new code, Western states are not led by their incompetent elected authorities at all but by a mixture of top civil servants and industrial contacts who form the “deep state”. This term refers to a community of unelected figures within the military and economic leadership of a country who decide what is best for everyone and what the wisest policy of the “elected” ruler should be. The wishes of the people, and in some cases even the wishes of the elected head of state, are subordinate to what the unelected experts and generals in particular departments say is necessary. The historic momentum of this “deep state” is such that it can be at war with its own people, even in the midst of what political scientists would call a healthy democracy. But if electoral democracy is actually meaningless and has no effect on the momentum of the state machinery, what is it for?
Democracy is most commonly bragged about when Western countries go to war, such as in the Iraq War or the UK’s recent move to bomb Syria without consulting public opinion. However, such acts were objectively anti-democratic. Polls everywhere showed massive popular opposition to the bombing. More importantly, the vast majority of Syrians cried out for their country not be bombed by Western aggressors like Britain. All popular cries for there to be no airstrikes, from the British or Syrian public, fell on the deaf ears of this fake democracy and the killing machine has been unleashed again.
Electoral democracy may amount to nothing other than the shallow ritual of the election. This is today more like a coronation, in the sense that it is supposed to make a ruler look more legitimate to an empty-headed audience. The ritual is done to dignify an excess of power and violence by what is still a small regime of armed thugs, who can now call themselves “legitimate” and others “illegitimate”. In fact, they are legitimate only insofar as they have fulfilled the minimum of their own absurd and arbitrary criteria to be called that.
Being an elected representative today is meaningless and hollow. It doesn’t mean a person is liked, and, in fact, most of them are hated passionately. Elected rulers are no more likely than a dictator to do what the millions of people they “represent” want. Due to the growth of populations since those offices were first established, what were once small and politically engaged communities are now faceless, vast and contradictory masses of people who cannot be sufficiently represented. Therefore, someone “elected” can do anything or nothing, no matter how unpopular, depending on whether the deep state will let him. The appearance of opposition or approval from the vast population of a modern state will be almost the same no matter what kind of rule follows. All this reduces “democracy” down to a mere idea, with no substance. It is not applied in any sense.
Although there is voter apathy, few people seriously question the legitimacy of so-called democracies as they exist today, but there are serious questions to ask. Why, for instance, are the same political families consistently nodded back into office over and over again in the United States? Why are they so special? And we must remember that this is the same regime that condemns other family-based governments in small states as “illegitimate”, or will instantly recognize the nomenklatura of a country like Libya or Syria and call for it to “go”. Should the people not recognize the Bushes and Clintons as corrupt ruling families and demand a ban on them being nodded into office again? A similar problem exists in the UK, but persists in the fact that only a few brats who attended expensive schools are ever raised as a politician.
If it is worthless trickery, as the vast majority of the youth will acknowledge by not participating, then why is so-called democracy maintained in the West? One answer is that it serves the already mentioned object of warmongering. Someone intoxicated by feelings of belonging to a great, superior democratic state after a favourable election will make war more promiscuously. Almost all Western aggression against non-Western countries is a crusade of “democracy”. If you strip them of their idol, it is like taking the cross away from those medieval lords and thugs who had the blood of oppressed people on their hands.
As in the past Westerners colonized the non-Western world with promises of the “true god”, today they colonize with promises of the “true democracy”. Eastern democracies like the Russian Federation or the Islamic Republic of Iran are dismissed as “false” by the theologians of Western superiority, but Western democracy is an equally meaningless coronation. All talk of “true” or “false” democracy by think tanks and regimes is a web of lies and self-deceptions to make white conquerors feel better about themselves when they commit murder.
Liberal democracy is not a perfect system of government, nor is it even recognizably much better than monarchies or dictatorships have been. Today’s Western democracies torture, spy, and make war on their own people, even comparing timid criticisms of their policies in the media with terrorist attacks. Today’s regimes are based on feeble assertions that a disinterested public has consented to be ruled, together with assertions of bygone cultural “values” that now offend everyone, and faded constitutions that cannot face the future.
Not only are Western democratic regimes not superior or more legitimate than others, but they are inferior and illegitimate because they encourage and excuse crimes against humanity. The offensive ideology waging war against humanity will go in the dustbin of history, and we will wish it was destroyed sooner.
Greg T ingey
This article it total trash, as evidenced by the supremely ignorant author’s comments on Britain.
Just because we have an hereditary head-of-state does not men that we are not, functionally, a republic – like Sweden, or Denmark, or Norway or the Netherlands, oops.
I suggest y ‘all move on, as there’s nothing to see here folks, other than the original author’s willy-waving.