 |
| Democracy in a post-democratic age. |
The peoples of Europe have been involved in a massive shell and pea game. I’m not quite sure when exactly the switch was made, but it was definitely made sometime, because when the shells stopped moving and we took our pick, there was no pea to be seen. The democracy we thought we were getting had dematerialized into rules, regulations, dictates from Brussels, "human rights" legislation, mind-control from the media, and supranational bodies telling us what to do all the time about everything!
“Where is our democracy?” we feebly ask, confused that, having jumped through the hoops and done the little dance with the ballot papers and boxes, we are still not getting it. Instead we get what they decide to give us. We get what we don’t want – exactly what we don't want. Then, when we complain, we are shown our signatures on the order form. "Yup, that's us," we meekly concur, scratching our heads. "I guess we did vote for that after all, but...but..." No buts. Welcome to post-democracy.
We know we've been cheated, but most of us still think we've just cheated ourselves and we guiltily accept it and decide to use more soap in the shower. The trouble is we've outsourced politics to a special class of parasites, one that has its own weaknesses and its own distant masters, so we keep getting things we don't want and never agreed to, but which we can't criticize without proclaiming ourselves to be dupes and fools, undeserving of a grown-up thing like deciding our own fate.
Immigration is a perfect example of all of this – the beating pulsating heart of post-democracy. Everywhere in Europe it is unpopular, even hated. It always has been as long as anyone can remember, even when the immigrants were of much higher caliber than they are today! People who have been lied to about it and its supposed benefits 24-7, still instinctively hate it and see it as poison. Those who like it like it for trivial reasons (e.g. curry). Those who don't like, dislike it for profound reasons (e.g. racial survival). But voting against it is as hard as picking the shell with the pea under it. Every time we think "this time" and lose.
In every European country, all the big parties are on-side on immigration, differing only in terms of degree. Any anti-immigration party that sets out to challenge this, has to build itself up from nothing, against a staggering array of obstacles designed to stifle it, confine it, or co-opt it, at least until the new demographics kick in and make it all irrelevant.
The complexity of society and the needs of the economy are invoked, "Yes, we agree with you, but..." and after that "but" comes a wide range of plausible reasons, some of which may even be true, but none of which have any right to get in the way of what the people really, really want and have always wanted, namely a cessation and reversal of mass immigration.
Immigration, quite simply, is the canary in the coalmine of democracy. If the people can't get what they want on this point, then it's a good bet that they are being shafted in every other way as well. But unlike tax, welfare, or other policies, immigration touches directly on the whole process of democracy itself by altering and undermining the electorate itself. In Tolkien-speak it is the "one ring to rule them all."
But when democracy of the vote fails–and it has failed–true democracy can only be revived and saved by democracy of the act.
Democracy, by definition and in its essence, is that which gives the people what they want. An act which has the same effect as the unfettered voice of a community would have is therefore a democratic act, even if that act is considered criminal, violent, or reprehensible in some way.
It is in this light that we should view reports of immigrants being forced out of certain neighbourhoods, or incidents like the torching of refugee centres and mosques that have been set up without consent from locals. The left has no compunction in agreeing with Martin Luther King that a riot is the "language of the unheard." If that's true, then racial attacks may very well be the legitimate votes of the unrepresented.
Recently there have been reports of "racism" in Northern Ireland.
Most of the incidents mentioned are small and measured:
Other parts of Europe that retain a strong sense of community see similar patterns, such as the town of Vorra, a small German town near Nuremburg (yes, we know) that recently found out it was going to be subjected to a permanent influx of asylum seekers with the creation of an asylum centre.
"Asylum seeker" is of course code for "largely young Islamic men without girlfriends but a lot of time to ogle and harass the local women, etc." Rather than waiting for the asylum seekers and the tsunami of rapes and sexual assaults that would have followed in their wake, some members of the community decided to pre-empt things by setting fire to the buildings that would have housed them.
If it has the same effect that actually allowing the community to vote on something would have, then, despite the criminality, it is in essence a representative and democratic act. In fact, compared to Black riots – the so-called "language of the unheard" – it is more democratic, as I suspect there are few Black communities that, if given the choice, would vote to become charred ruins with no retail sector.
In this post-democratic age of meaningless ballots and equivocating representatives, any community that wants its wishes to be acted upon will have to be prepared for a lot more democracy of the act and a lot less democracy of the vote in future.
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here. He is also featured in Arktos's collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.
Become a Patron!
“Where is our democracy?” we feebly ask, confused that, having jumped through the hoops and done the little dance with the ballot papers and boxes, we are still not getting it. Instead we get what they decide to give us. We get what we don’t want – exactly what we don't want. Then, when we complain, we are shown our signatures on the order form. "Yup, that's us," we meekly concur, scratching our heads. "I guess we did vote for that after all, but...but..." No buts. Welcome to post-democracy.
We know we've been cheated, but most of us still think we've just cheated ourselves and we guiltily accept it and decide to use more soap in the shower. The trouble is we've outsourced politics to a special class of parasites, one that has its own weaknesses and its own distant masters, so we keep getting things we don't want and never agreed to, but which we can't criticize without proclaiming ourselves to be dupes and fools, undeserving of a grown-up thing like deciding our own fate.
Immigration is a perfect example of all of this – the beating pulsating heart of post-democracy. Everywhere in Europe it is unpopular, even hated. It always has been as long as anyone can remember, even when the immigrants were of much higher caliber than they are today! People who have been lied to about it and its supposed benefits 24-7, still instinctively hate it and see it as poison. Those who like it like it for trivial reasons (e.g. curry). Those who don't like, dislike it for profound reasons (e.g. racial survival). But voting against it is as hard as picking the shell with the pea under it. Every time we think "this time" and lose.
 |
| "We voted for this??? Really???? |
The complexity of society and the needs of the economy are invoked, "Yes, we agree with you, but..." and after that "but" comes a wide range of plausible reasons, some of which may even be true, but none of which have any right to get in the way of what the people really, really want and have always wanted, namely a cessation and reversal of mass immigration.
Immigration, quite simply, is the canary in the coalmine of democracy. If the people can't get what they want on this point, then it's a good bet that they are being shafted in every other way as well. But unlike tax, welfare, or other policies, immigration touches directly on the whole process of democracy itself by altering and undermining the electorate itself. In Tolkien-speak it is the "one ring to rule them all."
But when democracy of the vote fails–and it has failed–true democracy can only be revived and saved by democracy of the act.
Democracy, by definition and in its essence, is that which gives the people what they want. An act which has the same effect as the unfettered voice of a community would have is therefore a democratic act, even if that act is considered criminal, violent, or reprehensible in some way.
It is in this light that we should view reports of immigrants being forced out of certain neighbourhoods, or incidents like the torching of refugee centres and mosques that have been set up without consent from locals. The left has no compunction in agreeing with Martin Luther King that a riot is the "language of the unheard." If that's true, then racial attacks may very well be the legitimate votes of the unrepresented.
Recently there have been reports of "racism" in Northern Ireland.
"According to the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI), in the 12 months to June 2014 racist incidents rose by 36%, from 830 to 1,132. In the same period, racist crimes increased by 51%, from 525 to 796. Most of the increase is concentrated within Belfast, where on average a racially motivated offence takes place at least once a day." BBCNorthern Ireland is a little different from the rest of the UK. One of the "blessings" of the peace agreement is that it made the province relatively safe for the same kind of immigrant influx that other parts of the UK and the Republic of Ireland have been experiencing. But, due to Nothern Ireland's history of sectarianism, the community spirit – both Catholic and Protestant – still remains a lot stronger than elsewhere in the UK.
Most of the incidents mentioned are small and measured:
"Incidents range from verbal abuse, to victims having stones thrown at their homes or rubbish dumped in their garden, Anna Lo of the cross-community Alliance Party tells me."Rather than extreme acts of random violence committed out of insane hatred, as the media pretends, they are attempts to put the minimum pressure necessary to force vanguard immigrants out of an area in order to protect the indigenous community from a subsequent loss of identity, coherence, and solidarity. It would, after all, be absurd for communities that have struggled long and hard to define themselves against other Whites with slightly different religious habits to just give up and allow people of entirely different races and religions to take over their neighbourhoods.
 |
| This does not make you a bad person, believe it or not. |
"Asylum seeker" is of course code for "largely young Islamic men without girlfriends but a lot of time to ogle and harass the local women, etc." Rather than waiting for the asylum seekers and the tsunami of rapes and sexual assaults that would have followed in their wake, some members of the community decided to pre-empt things by setting fire to the buildings that would have housed them.
“The renovated buildings were empty when the fires took hold on Thursday night. Firefighters quickly put out the blazes and no-one was seriously hurt. Swastikas were daubed on one building with the slogan "no asylum seeker in Vorra" - the town where it happened. Germany hosts more asylum seekers than any other country. Local authorities have been struggling to accommodate rising numbers of them, many of whom have fled the wars in Syria and Iraq. Police in Vorra estimate the fire damage at 700,000 euros (£555,000; $872,000). The three buildings were a former restaurant, a barn and a vacant block of flats.” BBCAll this unpleasantness, violence, and destruction could simply have been stopped by honouring the democratic principle. But, of course, "democracy" is mainly used as a trick to disenfranchise people. Mildly shocking as this act of arson was, can we really say it doesn't reflect the wishes of the community?
In this post-democratic age of meaningless ballots and equivocating representatives, any community that wants its wishes to be acted upon will have to be prepared for a lot more democracy of the act and a lot less democracy of the vote in future.
_________________________________________________________
Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Affirmative Right and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. Support his work by buying it here. He is also featured in Arktos's collection A Fair Hearing: The Alt-Right in the Words of Its Members and Leaders.
Become a Patron!
