Democracy Isn't Cool

The Founding Fathers of the United States didn't think Democracy was cool. This is why they established a Constitutional Republican government based on principles of liberty.

To support this premise, I'd like to present a few quotes to support that notion.

From Thomas Jefferson:

"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine."

"The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the rights of mankind."

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it."

From John Adams:

"Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide."

Here's one I've seen attributed to Ben Franklin and John Adams, although it appears to be unverified:

"Democracy has been defined as two wolves and a sheep discussing plans for lunch."

A second line is often added: "Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

If anyone can show me the original attribution, I would be grateful to correct this post.

In my search for quotes about Democracy by the Founding Fathers, I found that not all of them were consistent.

Jefferson also said:

"Information is the currency of democracy."

"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not."

On the surface, these statements may seem favorable to the idea of democracy, but not necessarily. The benefits of democracy suggest that the preponderance of public opinion would be listened to, heeded and acted on by politicians in government. However, if the individual is to have his rights respected and dignity acknowledged, the best form of government is one that protects him, even when the majority doesn't wish it so.

I believe that the government was set up by the Fathers to make it exceeding difficult and cumbersome for the government to become efficient and competent at exerting force on individuals. This was not intended so much to make life miserable for our public servants, but for people to exercise their own innate talents and creativity to solve their problems and provide for the benefit of society with as little as government assistance as possible.

Having Fun With Your Tax Dollars

They get to tax you, fund politically unpopular programs and wars, permit oligarchs to profit from inflation and now they get to charge fun and frolick on your dime.

From Hope Yen, Associated Press:
WASHINGTON - Federal employees charged millions of dollars for Internet dating, tailor-made suits, lingerie, lavish dinners and other questionable expenses to their government credit cards over a 15-month period, congressional auditors say.

A report by the Government Accountability Office, obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, examined spending controls across the federal government following reports of credit-card abuse at departments including Defense, Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs.

The review of card spending at more than a dozen departments from 2005 to 2006 found that nearly 41 percent of roughly $14 billion in credit-card purchases, whether legitimate or questionable, did not follow procedure — either because they were not properly authorized or they had not been signed for by an independent third party as called for in federal rules to deter fraud.

For purchases over $2,500, nearly half — or 48 percent — were unauthorized or improperly received.

Read the rest of the story here

It's bad enough the government has the privilege of confiscating our personal incomes and charge taxes on fuel and communications. Making the kind of purchases described in the article should be treated as the crime it really represents - theft of the American people's money.

If you rob a bank or your local 7-11 store, you go to jail. Period. End of discussion. A U.S. Dept. of Agriculture employee was sentenced to 21 months in prison for using her privilege to pamper her boyfriend. This is how all of these cases should be dealt with, but unfortunately this isn't the case.

As the government gets bigger, it becomes more difficult to reign in abusive behavior by individuals working for it. Some of the behaviors came from the Department of Homeland Security, a relative newcomer to the Leviathan, we know as the federal government.

Is it any wonder the Founder of this country stressed for small, limited government?

Somalia: Hope Without a State

East African country Somalia has gone without a central government since 2000 and appears to be doing just fine. I found this article on the Ludwig Von Mises Institute's web site: The Rule of Law without the State By Spencer Heath MacCallum.

The first part of the article talks about how Somalia succeeded in running itself without a central authority. This was accomplished in spite of efforts by the United Nations to establish a democratic form of government. It goes on to share statistics that indicate improving trends in the quality of life for Somalis. For example:

Life expectancy increased from 46 to 48.5 years. This is a poor expectancy as compared with developed countries. But in any measurement of welfare, what is important to observe is not where a population stands at a given time, but what is the trend. Is the trend positive, or is it the reverse?

Infant mortality per 1,000 births fell from 152 to 114.9.

Maternal mortality per 100,000 births fell from 1,600 to 1,100.

Percent of population with access to sanitation rose from 18 to 26.

Percent of population with access to at least one health facility rose from 28 to 54.8.

Percent of population in extreme poverty (i.e., less than $1 per day) fell from 60 to 43.2.

Fatalities due to measles fell from 8,000 to 5,600.

Another even more comprehensive study published last year by Benjamin Powell of the Independent Institute, concludes: "We find that Somalia's living standards have improved generally … not just in absolute terms, but also relative to other African countries since the collapse of the Somali central government."

Could it be that people living in what we in the developed nations call 'anarchy' are better off without a central government? The article explains that the key to Somalia's growing prosperity lies in an understanding of the Rule of Law, which they call 'Xeer." Without anyone telling them what to do, the Somalis reverted to family and clan traditions they practiced long before colonial rule.

Living in a country where the rule of law is continually under attack and subverted by its leaders, I find this to be a refreshing and enviable example of how freedom can work in a practical sense. It would certainly be next to impossible for the United States to emulate Somalia. Still, it sends a message to the elitists, hedgemons, tyrants and Hegelian despots that they are indeed dispensable.

Read the whole thing.