Marc ArsakThe writer is using an alias to prevent endangering his life, a realistic fear in the country in which he lives.
Born in ancient Greek city-states, democracy has always been far from being a perfect regime. Plato ranks democracy 4th out of 5 political regimes regarding the stability and the prosperity that they offer, with only tyranny being worse than democracy.
However, the Platonian world is not all black and white, and at times he does praise the democracy in his native Athens. If democracies functioned well for instance in Athens thousands of years ago, in America when she was established and in Switzerland, it is because, despite all the very real differences between any two randoms individuals put aside entire societies, the ones mentioned above were as homogenous as one can picture them to be. Plato notably believed that a democracy would not work unless its citizens are prepared for it. Democracy therefore goes hand in hand with a firm and fruitful education, and non-negotiable freedom of press and expression.
James Madison famously stated: "A people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both."
Libraries and the internet are rife with very fascinating articles about the reasons for which the Founding Fathers of the United States regarded democracy with suspicion, and who explain why they aimed for a constitutional republic that guaranteed protection from an eventual tyranny of the majority. Will the American brand of democracy, however, resist the tyranny of the minority? Are our democratic models in America, in Europe and Israel armed to face the tyranny of the minority?
Because they say so! Because that is how it is! These are the only answers the average Western man gets when he dares question things that are doing him more harm today than good. The Western man has to accept many things as good because “they” say so:
- He has to accept gay couples ordering babies on the internet as simple as a pizza delivery.
-He has to accept transgender people going into his wife and daughter’s bathroom because they say so.
-He has to accept multiculturalism as something enriching no matter if it brings rape and pedophilia with itself because they say so.
-He has to think that the establishment of yet another retarded, third-world, inherently racist and antisemitic Muslim hellhole called Palestine is a good thing, because why? You guessed it. Because they say so.
-And, even though democracy is a vague notion on whose meaning and utility the sages and men of wisdom have seldom agreed, he has to accept it no matter what form it takes, well, because they say so.
And in case you might not know who “they” refers to, please let me enlighten you. “They” means the moral relativists, politicians, media elite, university professors, journalists, leftist loonies and social justice warriors. That englobes anyone who gets to decide what you can like, what you can do, what you can say and what you can’t.
As I tried to deconstruct the word “religion” in my previous article about Islam, I will try to do the same here with “democracy”, a word that “they” employ, without in fact telling us what they mean by it.
Deconstruction, introduced mostly by the works of the French Jewish philosopher Jacques Derrida is defined as such by Merriam-Webster: a philosophical or critical method which asserts that meanings, metaphysical constructs, and hierarchical oppositions (as between key terms in a philosophical or literary work) are always rendered unstable by their dependence on ultimately arbitrary signifiers. In simpler words, words do not always mean what we actually think they do.
Deconstruction has been widely used to deconstruct the West, and the values that it is composed of. Marxist intellectuals of several decades have employed the method to ultimately present our values as meaningless, outdated, empty, bigoted or imperialistic in their own words. This however does not render the method per se futile, as in this day and age, given the vicious disinformation campaign most Western citizens have to deal with, it is not in vain to look up some key-words here and there in the dictionary, and to rethink such fundamental notions, such as religion or democracy.
Now let the deconstruction begin. Democracy was born in ancient Athens as a form of government. Etymologically it signifies the rule of the people.
What is a people? Merriam-Webster defines people as such: humans making up a group or assembly or linked by a common interest. Thus, both the definition of democracy and the definition of a people contradict the modern practice of democracy which is currently paving the path to the destruction of the West. In America, Europe and Israel, we can no more speak of the “rule of the people”, because there is no more one people, but different peoples. The peoples in question do not constitute “one people” because why? Because they are not linked by a common interest, as per to the definition taken out of a standard dictionary. These peoples are forced to “coexist” - and very unsuccessfully so - because the Western man has to accept multiculturalism as a given.
Multiculturalism has, however, meant anything but the multitude and the copresence of cultures. Its practice so far has been limited to the cleansing of the Judeo-Christian European culture and its replacement by some very inferior and barbaric cultures mostly from the Muslim world, which ultimately militate against anything Western progressives themselves stood for, most notably through the propagation of misogyny, homophobia and other kinds of genocidal intolerance with their primary targets being - of course - the Jews. Radically different interests, history, cultures, and languages are forced to coexist, and this to the detriment of native peoples of European descent who have shown nothing but hospitality, in particular through their more than generous welfare and social security systems. This hospitality however strictly applies to Muslims, and not so much to Jews whose safety in Europe are directly and mathematically affected by the presence of Muslims, and thus knowingly compromised by the ruling elite.
For instance, the human rights-loving European politicians advocate the admission of millions of Muslim refugees who bring nothing but rape, pedophilia, insecurity, jihad and genocidal antisemitism to our societies. They turn a blind eye to some very primitive practices in Muslim countries such as Saudi Arabia and those of their new buddies in Iran, not to mention the illegal Turkish occupation of Cyprus. Yet, they are so on-call to denounce any of Israel’s minimal measures of legitimate self-defense. Whereas they consider themselves to be committed democrats and argue that as liberal democracies European countries must open their doors to the invasion of people with no respect for democracy or for any law other than the Sharia, many European politicians ironically find the very existence of Israel - the only free democratic society in the region - offensive.
As mentioned above, at the very core of democracy, even at an etymological level, lies the people. Carl Schmitt, the renowned German jurist who exercised a great influence on Jacques Derrida amongst others, and who sadly became closely affiliated with Nazis, always maintained that democracy can only exist as long as it applies to the [one] people, and not to mankind. His vision of democracy might be interpreted as strictly ethnic and contradicts our modern societies who struggle to surpass ethnic differences. However, democracies have reportedly functioned in multiethnic societies. And that is because that multiplicity of ethnicities did not prevent them from sharing the same interests, the same vision of the world and goals for the future. In order words,
After decades of feminist extremism, obscene and indecent gay activism, the imposition of halal meat and food, one wonders whether the nominal majorities in the West, mostly of Christian heritage, have any respected rights remaining?
I personally believe that out of different ethnicities a people can be born from a shared past, a shared present and a shared future, while other key factors such as language, art, culture and of course education can contribute to this birth of a people, and thereby a functioning democracy, even if it could be far from perfection. Just as a reminder, what we refer to simply as a White Americans are descendants of those who did not get along so well in Europe, be it on religious or on cultural grounds. But through the application of the US Constitution and the values that the Founding Fathers values so much, a people was born. The American people.
In order to get back to my point it is essential to know that liberal democracies are characterized by parliamentarism, a system in which the people is represented by representatives in the parliament. It is [classically] liberal in a sense that through freedom of speech, the absolute truth, or even more importantly, the truth that corresponds to the will of the people was meant to triumph through discussion and dialog in the parliament.
Freedom of speech is more and more however under attack in the West. European intellectuals are taken to court and made to pay exuberant penalties for having denounced facts such as the overrepresentation of Muslims in European prisons, Muslim drug dealing mafias and Muslim child rape. The laws against racism and hate speech are often so vague that any court could interpret them at its convenience, expanding the ability of anyone to sue anyone for hate speech, thus destroying the lives and careers of many honest and prolific intellectuals, writers, and philosophers all over Europe.
Things in America are not much better. Even though the US Supreme Court famously allowed the Nazis to March in the heavily Jewish Skokie in the Nationalist Socialist Party v. Village of Skokie case in 1978, the very same Supreme Court has ruled against the freedom of speech of Pamela Geller and her organization American Freedom Defense Initiative through which she courageously exposes Islamic hatred.
The Founding Fathers of the United States believed that the truth would emerge from the free conflict of ideas, hence the First Amendment to the Constitution. But the current Supreme Court thinks that referring to jihadists as savages is disparaging.
Far from being open and inclusive, there is no end to how much I would like to emphasize on the exclusive nature of a functioning democracy. Ancient Greek democracies put their citizens always first and were very careful about who got to vote. Today, however, in America for instance, being a citizen is not so much a matter of merit and a successful integration anymore as it is a question of who manages to get away from the US border patrol and give birth to a child on American soil. Israel has also been forced to take in African “refugees” who cross the border into a free society, without any will to integrate, often intimidating many inhabitants with insecurity amongst other things wherever they reside. America and Israel will need to protect the exclusive nature of their democracies and prioritize their own citizens above anything else. Democracies exist as per the law, and laws are written on paper.
Papers do not defend themselves. We must defend our laws.
Another reason democracies are failing is that our educational systems are infested by political correctness. European public education specifically fails to transmit the sense of belonging to a nation by not teaching its history, its roots, its language and its culture. Many schools do not teach the history of European colonial era and the Holocaust lest Muslims are offended. The Christian roots of Europe are systematically denied, with one French European commissioner going as far as stating that Europe has no Christian roots.
In spite of the fact that generations of Muslim immigrants on European soil can not speak the European languages correctly, often deforming them and creating their own variants, many European schools opt instead for the teaching of “native mother tongues”, namely Arabic and Turkish amongst others. Art and literature are often neglected and considered elitist, turning Europe from being a continent of great art, great music, and great literature to that supplying a mind-blowing number of Muslim terrorists, who get to travel the world freely holding European passports.
Our school system and our democracies also fail to teach us personal responsibility. Being a citizen of a democracy means having rights, but it also means having responsibilities. However as I mentioned before, the tyranny of the minority which is something that most theoreticians were not prepared for, has turned our societies into those of rights, and rights solely with no responsibilities.
After decades of feminist extremism, obscene and indecent gay activism, the imposition of halal meat and food, one wonders whether the nominal majorities in the West, mostly of Christian heritage, have any respected rights remaining? Every minority constantly asks for something more. It is all about having a privileged status. A Muslim can cite the Koran chapter and verse, incite to the hatred of Jews, Christians, and gays and get away with it. However if a non-Muslim points out to those facts, also using the Koran chapter and verse to support his claim, he will be taken to court for being racist, even though Islam is not a race.
The entire public school program in France was under question so that no pork meals would be served in public canteens so as not to offend Muslims. In such cases, leftist politicians and otherwise genocidally anti-Semitic Muslim activists include the Jews in their causes as well and say that pork should not be served out of respect for Jews and Muslims. What they fail to mention is that the Jewish population of France is less than a tenth of its Muslim population, and that affected by a forced mass exodus due to the insecurity caused by Muslim presence and intimidation, it is mostly concentrated in the Parisian area with most of those Jewish children who would refuse to eat pork attending Jewish schools anyway. So, thank you very much for your concern, but you can keep it for yourself as no one needs it.
In conclusion, I must say that I did not want to write yet another article about Islam. But Islam brings light to how deeply feeble and deficient our democratic models are.
As we saw yet again in Nice, Islam is obsessed with killing us, infidels, whether we wish to acknowledge it or not. We should make our democracies, our citizenship and immigration laws as restrictive and exclusive as possible, particularly since our welfare states can not afford the weight of non-working polygamous families with tens of children per wife, most of whom can not speak our languages correctly. Exclusion, mass denaturalization of those with dual citizenship with Muslim countries, and the systematic deportation of illegal aliens and foreign delinquents, criminals and felons on legal visas seem to be an essential and primordial step to take in order to ensure a future for our democratic societies.
Our educational systems must be patriotic, or at least honestly reflective of the laudable achievements of the European, American and the Jewish people. We should also teach that citizenship comes not only with rights but also responsibilities. Being a citizen is not a divine right anywhere, it should be a question of merit.
-What have the vast majority of Arab citizens of Israel done, except for silence vis-à-vis the incitement and hatred on behalf of their Arab brothers no matter how much of a minority the latter are?
-How many of them sing the national anthem, how many of them would not refuse to wave an Israeli flag?
-How many of them refer to themselves as Israelis and consider the existence of the country who has given them one of the highest standards of living and a very generous welfare system as legitimate?
These are some legitimate questions to pose. I might remind us all that the democratic parliamentary legal system is also designed to help turn into law - and thus legal - something that is deemed legitimate by the public opinion. On the verge of civil war, I believe that Western European politicians, in particular, should give the very legitimate idea of mass repatriation, mass remigration and mass denaturalization of practicing Muslims in Europe a thought, without which bloodshed in a religious war, ultimately turning into a racial war is inevitable. And in this war, non-practicing Muslims, atheist ex-Muslims and those Muslims who have converted to other religions, as well as the Jews will be the innocent victims.
We all know very well, that sadly many more Muslim terror attacks such as those in Nice, Paris, Tel Aviv, Orlando, and too many other cities, too numerous to count will recur, with our politicians not having the slightest amount of will to change anything, even though the exclusivity inherent to the democratic ideology, provides us with all the measures we need to take. The peoplehood required for the well-functioning of a democracy does not suggest perfect individuals who all love and care for each other. It requires a people who are aware of both their rights and responsibilities, and who respect the law and each other’s rights, while not aiming for the destructing of the very democratic system that helps them grow.