1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/16796/please-vote-for-me/

Please Vote for Me

May 5, 2011 by

Support is bought and sold. Assistants change sides. There are lies, betrayal, and bribery. FULL ARTICLE by Stefano R. Mugnaini


Grant May 5, 2011 at 9:04 am

“Democracy is when people rule themselves.”

No. Democracy is how 51% force the other 49% to live the way the majority sees fit.

Stefano May 5, 2011 at 12:37 pm

For what it’s worth, I agree with you. I didn’t like that sentence. Perhaps it would be more exact to say that the goal of democracy is to create an environment that allows self-rule.

Jim P. May 7, 2011 at 9:29 pm

Agreed also. Democracy is when everybody competes to rule everybody else. This is incompatible with individualism. Also, you can’t have a democracy without having a State to enforce the “will” of some of the people.

James C May 5, 2011 at 5:06 pm

51% of what? in 2010, the US federal elections turnout was about 83 million, even though the population of the US is over 300 million. not to mention that legal residents who lived in the US for decades cant vote without naturalizing (although i can understand why). i find the claim “democracy is tyranny of the majority” to be disconnected from reality, since, for better or for worse, a good chunk of Americans who are voting eligible couldnt care less about elections altogether. on a more technical note, its completely incorrect, since a majority of votes isnt even necessary to win elections with our current voting system, just a plurality.

Horst Muhlmann May 5, 2011 at 9:44 am

“People call the Chinese ‘communist’. California and Massachusetts are more communist than China”

Jim Rogers

Jim P. May 5, 2011 at 5:32 pm

I must admit, I dislike it greatly when Jim Rogers uses such hyperbole. Not only is it obviously false, but it comes across as an apology for the incredible tyranny in China. CA, MA, NY, CT (and many other states) are increasingly BIG and thus increasingly socialistic, but this is nothing compared to China. California only wishes it was China.

Bill Baerg May 5, 2011 at 6:09 pm

I really liked the review. So much so that I want to see the documentary !! I found a download of it but the file ends in ( .rar ) My computer does not handle this file and it goes and finds a site that sells a program to “fix” that. I don’t trust it because it messes with the registry. Has anyone else tried to do the same and found a solution ??

Jack May 5, 2011 at 6:23 pm

download winrar .rar is a archived file.

integral May 6, 2011 at 5:45 am

If the download is a single file that ends in rar, it is usually a fraudulent file. That is, it will require you to register somewhere in order to get the password to open the file. It is unlikely that the file contained within your Rar- archive is the film you’re looking for.

The ‘legitimate’ films that are downloaded as a rar-archive are usually divided into 30+ pieces in order to conform to requirements that became the defacto file-sharing ‘standard’ during the newsgroup era. (Along with some other features that are useful in the era of bittorrent.)
You should look for another version, either through legal or legitimate downloading, pirated (if you want to), or by purchasing it from a vendor.

In any case, if the rar-archive you have downloaded is password protected, do not register at any site nor download any special video-viewing software, because you’re being had.

J. Murray May 6, 2011 at 6:39 am

As an addendum, RAR files are rarely used anymore with the popularity of Torrents and now streaming. Movies are typically Torrented so when you finish downloading, it’s immediately ready to watch. Look for files that end in .avi, mp4, or some other extension identifying it as a video file. I’d suggest getting the Combined Community Codec Pack, it has a list of video file extensions plus allows you to easily play them. As noted by integral, RARs were used when there was a maximum space constraint for individual files. I remember using WinRAR to cut files up to fit them on 3.5″ floppies back when CD burners didn’t exist or were ridiculously expensive. Not much call for that these days considering multiple gigabyte USB devices are dirt cheap.

Stefano May 7, 2011 at 10:50 pm

I just watched it on Netflix. It’s one of their instant streaming movies. (and if you act now, you can probably get a free trial! )

NG May 5, 2011 at 6:10 pm

We no longer have a democracy; we have a bureaucracy. We have a governing class, a system of regulators and bureaucrats and government employees who have their own sets of right and benefits beyond the rest of the citizenry and the ability to make us bend to their wills under threat of penalties ranging from mere inconveniences to fines to incarceration.

Dan May 5, 2011 at 9:56 pm

Well written article. The main point is gripping: We are born to be free, it is in our nature to be free. Profound.


Daniel May 5, 2011 at 11:35 pm

Sorry, but democracy (as it exists today) blows chunks

Dan May 6, 2011 at 10:11 am

No argument from anyone here I suspect. It’s not an easy issue to come down on because in colonial America for example, democratic control of bureaucrats was instrumental in bringing some control to elitist bureaucrats installed by the crown. This did permit “the people” to achieve more control over the government then before.

That being said, none of the founders believed in anything remotely close to full enfranchisement for the masses. In just about every area of the colonies, when democracy was instituted it was only white males above a certain age who owned a defined amount of property that could vote. Later (near the revolution) a lot of townships, etc got rid of the property qualification or reduced it significantly.

So we see what appears to be a contradiction: Democratic reform can result in changes (and frequently has in the past) which ends up largely increasing liberties in society. On the other hand, everyone is familiar with the problem of the 51% rulling the 49%. Moreover, one of the fundamental problems with democracy is that Peter will ALWAYS vote to use the state apparatus to take the fruits of his more productive neighbor, Paul.

What the !*&% is the solution? I wish I knew. Perhaps a mix of democratic control and a very de-centralized state? In my humble opinion, the de-centralization is key to a free society and well defined property rights. Unfortunately, old abe kind of put a halt to that.

What is the solution? How do we keep the state/and or the masses from taking everything? Small government ALWAYS gets larger, and your neighbor doesn’t care about morals or property rights when he gets a check from the state courtesy of you.



Heather May 6, 2011 at 2:08 am

The founding fathers feared democracy as much as monarchy.

Despite decades of lies from schools, media, and presidents, America is not supposed to be a democracy, but a republic. Not a democratic republic, a constitutional republic.

The word democracy does not appear once in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. And I suspect the words “to the republic for which it stands” are the real reason the pledge was removed from schools, can’t have kids questioning that little detail.

In a republic your rights are given by your creator, whoever that may be, and cannot be taken from you by anyone. In a democracy the mob can (and eventually will) legalize taking everything you have. Historically tyranny always follows democracy.

Anyhow, interesting article all the same!

Alex May 6, 2011 at 9:36 am

Regardless what Constitution says, your rights belong to the government. It can take them away for any reason or no reason at all. All it takes is 200+ votes in the House, 60+ votes in the Senate, and a Prez’s signature.

Stefano May 7, 2011 at 10:48 pm

I would argue that rights can be taken away just as completely in a republic; though the process may be different. As stated above, I wasn’t intending to argue that we are, or should be, a democracy; my point, which I hope was received, was that the desire for liberty is innate to the human spirit, and the tendency of coercive power to corrupt is almost universal. (Crap, I should have written that!)

Sharpshooter, Cheyenne, WY May 8, 2011 at 9:25 pm

Not only is the process different, it’s much more difficult BY DESIGN.

Sharpshooter, Cheyenne, WY May 8, 2011 at 9:24 pm

A proper Republic is the only form of a society holding of the individual over the state/mob. A democracy is too wobbly and subject to whims-of-the-moment.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: