Is There An
Anti-Democratic
Movement In The US?
by
R.E. Prindle
My attention
was drawn to the above linked article by a Facebook colleague, Michael Sellers.
Michael is a Liberal and viewed the
article differently than myself who am a historical researcher and hence have
no interest in political labels as such.
I try to rise above current disputes to put them into a larger or macro
historical context. As President Obama
says of himself: when they go low I go
high.
Thus the
article of 10/24/16 by one Jeet Heer entitled The Right Is Giving Up On
Democracy seemed to me to be analyzable in a macro context; that is Global
rather than parochial. That involves the
current problem of the transfers of populations from one area of the globe to
another. This usually means from outside
Euroamerica to European and North American countries.
As
Euroamerica is the gold standard for advanced cultures the migrants come from
less developed countries and often from medieval or even primitive cultures
centuries behind in modern knowledges.
While these migrants appear to adapt to the advanced culture of
Euroamerica it is but doubtful they can understand it.
Such is the
case with Jeet Heer who wrote the article under consideration. While biographical information is difficult
to obtain about Mr. Heer he came from Southern India. He now resides in the Canadian Province of
Manitoba, Canada. Whether Mr. Heet was
born in Canada or arrived in North America as a young child isn’t clear. At any rate his parents are native to
India. Why they chose to leave that
beautiful warm country for cold and desolate Canada seems inscrutable but
apparently they were dissatisfied with that ancient and lovely culture. Perhaps India wasn’t diverse enough, so they
chose to live in the multi-cultural West.
As any
trans-national migrant knows, or should know, the transition from being an
Indian to an English speaking Canadian would be difficult. However as India was tutored by England over
a period of centuries that has melded to some extent Indian and English mores
and customs perhaps the Heer family foresaw fewer problems than they
experienced. In any event as Mr. Heet
says they brought the whole extended Heer family after them.
As the
Americas were settled by peoples from outside the continent a certain attitude
developed toward immigrants that favors new migrants over older migrants; that
is new migrants are allowed to dispossess older migrants in much the same way
that the exogenous peoples originally dispossessed the indigenous peoples.
It is no
surprise then that Mr. Heer was been made senior editor of the US Communist
magazine The New Republic while older migrants perhaps more qualified were
passed over. While, from reading Mr.
Heer’s work, I am sure there must be more qualified people from an earlier wave
of migrants who understand that strange beast, the American psyche,
better. I must believe that Mr. Heer is
unqualified for the position he enjoys, I don’t see the necessary acumen.
Mr. Heer
titles his article: The Right Is Giving
Up On Democracy. He does this without
realizing the Left’s definition of democracy.
He apparently thinks theirs is the only definition while there are many
others. In mid-twentieth century US
democracy was understood to mean that class distinctions had a minimal effect on any and individual’s
right to achieve whatever his abilities permitted. At the three quarter point of the century the
Liberal reinterpretation of democracy began to replace the traditional idea.
Democracy
since that point has been interpreted to mean that collectives have rights to
extort whatever they can to dominate society disregarding individual
rights. Each collective is supposed to
have a right to a proportional representation regardless of individual ability
that displaces merit. Thus the lesser
able or qualified displace the meritorious.
For instance, since women constitute roughly 50% of the population it is
thought right that 50% of all, say, executives must be women regardless of
merit if they are not then democracy is being violated. Racially it is thought that executives must
‘look like’ the population. That is the
colored should displace whites regardless of merit. No tests of ability are permitted because
that might be discriminatory. Thus the
best will be shunted aside to satisfy ideology.
That seems to be how Mr. Heet got his job.
So, he says
the right is giving up on democracy, but the Left abandoned democracy long
ago. Apparently Mr. Heer cannot
recognize that the Leftist president, Barack Obama created an authoritarian
dictatorship eight years ago. Obama has
rigged the system. He assumes the roles
of the executive, legislative and judicial in himself. He was in the process of appointing stooges
to the Supreme Court who wouldn’t challenge his preemption of Congress by
issuing executive orders because the ‘emergency’ of the moment required it. The Left calls this democracy.
It is no
wonder then that the Right realizing that democracy had been aborted began
searching for an alternative. Catching
this sets Mr. Heer off on his rant. He
follows the Leftist rhetoric. Naturally
he builds his case on a rejection of his scapegoat Trump. Because in the Third Debate in a provocative
question from the Jewish moderator, Chris Wallace, who demanded irrelevantly of
Trump whether, as I understood it, Trump would contest the count if it went
against him. Trump’s answer was a
reasonable, we’ll wait and see. Mr. Heer
interpreted the question and answer to mean Trump would lead an armed uprising,
hence giving up on democracy.
It was of
course a set up question as Hillary answered decidedly Yes. But, of course, if your party were rigging
the election in your favor who wouldn’t.
Trump’s
answer then prompted Mr. Heer to come to the startling conclusion: ‘As always with Trump the temptation is to
interpret this apostasy through the lens of individual psychology.’ [By ‘apostasy’ I presume Mr. Heer means from democracy
as though democracy were a religion.]
Heet
continues: This diagnosis is easy
enough: By discounting the election results
beforehand, Trump was preemptively assuming the role of a sore loser,
exhibiting an irresponsible peevishness all too characteristic of his runaway
narcissism and his sexism….
Whew! He’s got the words but not the rhythm. Sexism?
What’s that? Aren’t homosexuals
and lesbians sexist by their very nature?
Isn’t feminism sexist for the same reason? Aren’t those groups aggressive in their
sexism? Are not they narcissistic by definition? You see how Mr. Heer undermines his own
argument.
And then…Mr.
Heer slams half the country, dividing it into two camps …’and bringing the
yahoos of the Republican base along with him.’
The left has a lot of defamatory names for those who disagree with
them. Defamation is their mode of
argument. Obama called us Domestic
Terrorists among many others, racists.
Knuckle draggers, that is, I presume, gorillas (gorilla is a racist word
in the US, ape, monkey) but the Left don’t pay no mind unless it is used
against them.
Then comes
another unwarranted assumption: ‘Yet
such a personalized account of Trump’s behavior has the effect of letting his
political party and supporters off the
hook. Not just for supporting him but
for sharing his grim view of American democracy.’
Can Mr. Heer
support such inflammatory opinions, for that is all they are. I don’t think he
has accurately represented me in his blanket condemnation of Trump
supporters. But Mr. Heer is just getting
started. I’m just hitting the high spots
now. Nearly every sentence is wildly
wide of the mark.
After
excoriating Trump in his first couple pages or four or five hundred words Mr.
Heer then turns to the matter of his article’s title, that of the right giving
up on democracy. Which of many versions
of democracy he doesn’t say but one presumes all democracy but more especially
the ‘our’ democracy of the Left.
He does
however provide a reason for the Right’s giving up on democracy, he says: ‘Beyond this election, beyond even the fate
of the Republican Party, there is a significant minority of Americans who are
giving up on democracy because it doesn’t serve their purpose of upholding a
white Christian patriarchy.’
If one dissects
this sentence one quickly discerns that what we have here is a religious fear. Mr. Heer isolates the religious fear of
democracy as a White Christian matter.
This begs the question of the fear of democracy of other religions. How exclusive is this fear to
Christianity? Certainly the Semitic
religions are consumed by fear of democracy they being in essence authoritarian
in nature. Does Mr. Heer think that
Moslemism is democratic in its beliefs?
Surely, he jests. There is no
more authoritarian patriarchal religion and government than Moslemism. Has Mr. Heer never heard of ISIS? Need I say more? Nor is the Judaic religion any more
democratic than Moslemism. Judaism is
the father of Moslemism.
We have no
way of knowing whether Mr. Heer is Moslem or Hindu but need I remind Mr. Heer
that Hinduism is a caste society where neither equality or democracy has been
known for millennia. Mr. Heer must know
all this so that isolating Christianity as paternalistic and undemocratic is
sheer and total bigotry. Therefore we
are right to treat Mr. Heer himself as an unbalanced bigot.
How then ae
we to treat Mr. Heer’s ridiculous statement: ‘Trump’s anti-democratic rhetoric-
and the eagerness of so many good white patriotic Americans to cheer it and believe
it- as a symptom of the larger trend on the political right toward doubting the
legitimacy of the American system. The
question that we need to be asking isn’t, “Why is Trump being such a jerk?” It’s why is the American Right giving up on
democracy?’
Why
indeed? Could it be that anti-democratic
forces such as the Moslems, the Jews and Negroes have very nearly subverted
democracy itself making its maintenance impossible in a multi-cultural
environment in which so many of those cultures have no tradition of democracy,
don’t understand it and see no reason to maintain it.
While
fashionably inveighing against authoritarian government that is the very form
of government they wish to impose making themselves the supreme law giving
culture. Thus we have the Moslem wish to
impose Sharia law in the West, the Jewish wish to impose Jewish law, the Negro
wish to impose African supremacy and so on.
The chorus of all is that Whites have to submit to their particular
mores, laws and culture. Whites simply
cannot exist.
Mr. Heer
must know this and our Mike Sellers ought to know this. Please abandon the hypocrisy. Democracy is over, murdered by the very
people appearing to laud it. Today it is
culture against culture, all against one and one against all.
Whites
should bloc vote for Trump; it is every culture for itself.
Vote Trump or get on your knees.
