|1. Introduction||2. Unqualified Voters|
|3. Rational Ignorance||4. Corrupt Voters|
|5. Voters Irrationality||6. Medias Manipulate|
|7. Colleges Brainwash||8. Dictatorship and Democracy|
Listening to politicians' speeches, one might get the notion that democracy is a new state religion, which has replaced Christianity. The former Danish prime minister Helle Thorning spoke typically not so much about, what was good for Denmark, but about what was good for "our democracy". Politicians highlight rather that their proposals are beneficial to democracy than that they are beneficial to Denmark. But the intent of democracy must be the simple that you think it is a kind of tool, a practical system to identify the right leaders and take the right decisions for the benefit of the whole people's prosperity and freedom and the nation's future existence.
So-called Danish Muslims on the march. Photo Document.dk
But today it is clear that precisely the democratic system has been an important cause of disastrous mistakes. The voters' majority has voted for politicians, who have allowed the immigration of hundreds of thousands of indigestible Muslims, who intend to take over the country when they become numerous enough.
It is becoming very clear that this problem can only be solved by sending the Muslims back to countries that have the culture and the religion that they love so much, closing mosques and banning the Quran. It is easy to understand logically, but emotionally indigestible for the vast majority of voters; Therefore the politicians tell us after every terrorist attack that we should "Simply continue our daily lives as usual, because otherwise, the terrorists have won" - Put another way: we should simply pretend nothing had happened, then problems will most likely disappear by themselves - which is what the vast majority of anxious voters want to hear.
Voters make decisions of the most vital importance to the nation without the necessary basic knowledge; they are not qualified decision makers. The overwhelming majority of voters in the modern mass-democracy has nothing or a very superficial knowledge of economics, diplomacy, military tactics and strategy - indeed, in modern times, they do not even know their own nation's history. This corresponds to a doctor performing brain surgery without knowing even basic anatomy.
Winston Churchill said: "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with an average voter"
The American stand-up comedian George Carlin said the famous: "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups". From Whistleblower Newswire.
Well over 90% of the voters are only temporary and superficial interested in the nation's problems and give their votes controlled by transient likes and dislikes of the candidates, their personality, gender and appearance.
Further, some voters have problems with motivation. They are not at all supporters of the organization that they have been entrusted to take care of. Young politically correct people believe that the nations, including Denmark, must be closed down and the area must be subjected to a form of European or world government. The thousands of Muslims that the politicians have given the right to vote, will close down the nation of Denmark and place the area under a worldwide caliphate.
All this means that the winners of the elections will not necessarily be those that are the best to solve the nation's problems; But they will most often be candidates, who are experts in saying, what voters want to hear.
Typical politicians are created and fostered by the modern political system - it is not the reverse. Plato described that time politicians, the sophists, and we recognize the modern politicians. He compared the people, the voters, with a large and powerful animal, which was cared for, nurtured and fed by the politicians: "Further, I would have you consider that the hireling Sophist only gives back to the world their own opinions; he is the keeper of the monster, who knows how to flatter or anger it and observes the meaning of his inarticulate grunts. Good is, what pleases him, evil what he dislikes; truth and beauty are determined only by the taste of the brute. Such is the Sophist's wisdom, and such is the condition of those, who make public opinion the test of truth, whether in art or in morals." (The Republic)
A scene from the Peloponnesian war on a Greek vase. Thucydides was contemporary with Plato. He wrote the history of the Peloponnesian war. Thomas Hobbes and many others believe that his clear message was that Athens lost the war because it was a democracy. The voters of Athens proved to easy to excite for unwise actions that led to unnecessary losses and defeats.
When one on an election day sees that after the first 20% of the votes are counted, the final result can be predicted with good statistical certainty, so you can feel that the mass of voters really is a big and strong animal that reacts predictably to certain stimulations and irritations. And the politicians are its keepers, who are experts in the habits and behaviors of the animal.
The voters' rational ignorance describes that they deliberately do not want to get acquainted with the political problems, because this will require costs in time and effort, while individual's benefits of his efforts in practice will be zero.
Voters Rational Ignorance.
Moreover, a voter, who has spent many hours to get acquainted with the problems, may on the election night experience being run over by millions of ignorant voters, whose votes count just as much as his, and that will make him frustrated. He will think that it is better to take it quite calmly and keep an ironic distance to the whole political circus.
One would think that if all voters really consciously chose to be relatively ignorant of the nation's problems, democracy would create terrible results - and looking around in Mjoelner Park, Gellerup Park, Wolls Mose and similar Muslim parallel societies, which have been created on the basis of such democratic decisions, one must acknowledge that it is actually the case.
Teachers and authorities constantly encourage citizens to keep up with politics, so that democracy can work. But they work against the wind: it is truly an inherent feature of the modern democratic system that individuals are motivated not to spend time on issues concerning the nation's management.
Voters Rational Ignorance. From Le Quebecois Libre.
The concept of rational ignorance was introduced by Anthony Downs in 1957: "It is irrational (for individuals) to be politically informed because the low return from data simply does not justify their costs in time and other resources."
The logic is simple. Time is money, and it takes time to acquire information also about political issues. The individual's benefit from his political efforts will in practice be zero, and therefore the rational selfish individuals prefer to spend their time and energy on something else that is more related to their own lives and careers.
Politicians lure voters with benefits at the expense of others. Photo Ola Betiku.
Corruption means that people who have been entrusted with control of someone else's money are acting for their own personal benefit.
The combination of welfare state and democracy makes all voters corrupt. The political game goes very much that all groups seek to achieve economic benefits at the expense of other groups. In the democratic state, there are no limits to how far the state can penetrate into the individuals' economy. In theory, everything can be taxed, the only limitation is the practical possibilities for checking that taxpayers really pay.
Democracy has always been associated with that everyone owns each other's property and can tax it and confiscate it after the majority's decisions. Aeschines was a politician from Athens, one of the contemporaries of Plato and Socrates. In connection with a mention of such taxes and confiscations, he gives the following comment: "The Athenians come out of Ecclesia (Athens People's Assembly), not as they come from a political assembly, but if they come from a business meeting in which the profit has been distributed."
"Welfare for all". Politics in the modern mass democracy is much about to gain advantages at the expense of others. Photo Allan Ohms.
All groups in the modern mass democracy maneuver and position themselves to gain economic benefits at the expense of others.
One might think that politicians should follow the sound accounting principle that those, who cause the costs, should also pay. Let's say car owners pay for transport and traffic costs, families with children pay the cost of schools and kindergartens, property owners pay for utilities and so on. However, the piano does not play this tune, taxes and charges are decided as they are "politically possible" - all maneuver to get the others to pay. The left wing wants "the rich" to pay their transfer income with top tax and business tax; Homeowners do not want to pay real estate taxes; Students want higher financial study support, retirees want higher elderly checks, and so the game continues and forward and backwards in infinity.
Most voters unconsciously form their political attitudes based on their feelings. Women use the election as a weapon against the enemy of feminism, the evil white men; they go to the polls determined to show them that they should not decide everything! Left-wing voters use the election action to take down the rich. All men are competing for the love of women, and male voters may feel an unconscious aversion to a candidate, who is a man in his prime - because he is a rival.
Tens of thousands irrational Swedish voters gathered for "kaerleksmanifestation" on Sergels Torg in Stockholm exactly two days after a Muslim terrorist killed four and wounded at least fifteen in the Drottninggatan pedestrian street quite nearby. Photo Snaphanen.dk.
Ordinary voters are anxious; they dearly wish that everything will continue as it always has done. That's why it is so effective to stamp political opponents as far right or left. Most voters are ready to accept any argument, telling them that everything will remain as before, no matter how bad and illogical it is.
If one imagines that in 1944 or the spring of 1945 a referendum had been held in Denmark about whether there should be resistance or not against the German occupation, there would probably have been a significant majority to reject any resistance.
Only a minority is thinking rationally of Mother Denmark's future prosperity and happiness.
The individual can be an excellent decision maker in everything concerning his private life, finances and career, but when it comes to political choices, he will often decide impulsively without deeper rational considerations. He may unwittingly rely on whether the candidate seems sympathetic and if he says the right things that he has heard before in school and in the media.
The rational voter is a myth. From Woodgate's View - The Irrational Voter - drawing by Dan Berger.
Descartes wrote: "For it seemed to me that I could find much more truth in the reasonings that each person makes concerning matters that are important to him, and whose outcome ought to cost him dearly later on if he judged badly than in those reasonings engaged in by a man of letters in his study, which touch on speculations that produce no effect and are of no other consequence to him except perhaps that, the more they are removed from common sense, the more pride he will take in them."
Apparently, it is the case that the individual will think deeply of problems that concern him personally and which he believes, he can influence. While issues whose solution is beyond his reach, he will not consider further; He simply wants to follow the common opinion because he unconsciously feels that it will be beneficial to his life and career. This means that if an attitude has gained momentum and got a foothold in popular debates, it will be almost unstoppable with democratic means, no matter how absurd and harmful it is. The comprehensive support for Islamic immigration, feminism and the worldwide idea that humans are responsible for the climate of the planet are good examples. When such a case first rolls, it will suck up everything like a rolling snowball. Media, teachers, politicians, artists and actors, all who make their living by being popular, as well as women and young people seeking opposition, all wish to acquire the correct attitudes of the future.
The individuals choose the irrational by rational considerations. Without special deep considerations, an individual can choose to join a particular religious faith or a more loose group bound together by semi-religious attitudes on climate, solidarity with developing countries and the like because he basically feels lonely in his life and would like becoming part of a community. Not that he scheming and cunningly pretends to believe - One can choose to believe in order to be accepted in the group.
About to get a job or not depends a lot on whether you know someone, who knows someone; And therefore it is necessary to participate in different groups. If you want to meet a woman that you want to live with, you must have a form of social circle, where she can be found. In general, we can only be happy for a long time, when we are connected to a community - which almost always - formally or informally - is connected with common religion, political attitude, worldview or ideas about human nature or the like.
Many held out for many years in the Communist Party loyal to Moscow, although it soon became clear that the theory could not be true - because you do not let down your comrades.
Thousands of irrational Swedish voters gathered for "love manifestation" at Sergels Torg in Stockholm show a big red love-heart exactly two days after a Muslim terrorist killed four and injured many more. As seen, it's not only young girls. Photo Facebook.
You often hear religious people argue that if you became a believer, you would have a more harmonious and happy life. However, this is not rational. The first and crucial question should be: is it true that there is a God with these characteristics? If the answer becomes a yes, then you can be lucky to enjoy a harmonious life enlightened by the truth with other believers.
Modern empirical research suggests that religious people consistently enjoy greater satisfaction with their lives than others. It is no wonder that people protect their irrational beliefs and attitudes toward criticism and cling to them if counter arguments should have seeped through their defenses.
The media manipulate voters. Newspapers and TV stations are the keys to political power in modern mass-democracy.
For the majority of voters, the decision on which candidate to vote for is a kind of intellectual left-hand work; it is not something that they give many and deep thoughts - and therefore they are easily influenced by the media that have more specific ideas about what they should think.
Democracy theorists believe that it is no problem that 98% of voters are unqualified, corrupted and irrational decision makers. For when they vote completely by random - like when you flip a coin - their votes will in the long run amount to 49% for and 49% against in all questions. The remaining 2%, who are the qualified and rational voters, will then decide the matters, thereby ensuring that democracy works for its purpose and makes the right decisions.
The Danish School of Journalism has made a distinctly left-wing extremist video with the aim of recruiting new students. Violent demonstrations, fights with police and violation of rules are key components of the video call to be a journalist. The first scene shows a hooded demonstrator with a torch in hand, while you hear a police siren. Then they simply have envisioned the type of future journalist. The video speaks confidentially to the young people, who are doing this kind: "To you, who know the rules in order to break them" - Photo Den Korte Avis.
It may sound convincing, but there is a snake in Paradise. The vast majority of the unqualified and irrational voters do not form their opinions at random, they get them from the media. They sit faithfully on the couch in semi-darkness in front of the television and watch the news that the journalists think it is good for them to see. And media and journalists are not objective. It has been demonstrated many times that journalists' political attitudes lie far to the left of the ordinary voters'; They have the attitude complex that is called political correctness.
The German politician Thilo Sarrazin has in a speech defined political correctness in 13 points, which include: "Inequality is bad - equality is good" - "All cultures are equal" - "Islam is the religion of peace." - "There is no natural difference between men and women" - "Man's abilities are mainly shaped by training and education. Inherited differences play only a marginal role." - "The only difference between people of different races is the appearance" - "The nation is an outdated institution" - and so on.
Most very young voters also do not vote randomly but influenced by the politically correct attitudes that they have got in schools and universities.
It's easy to brainwash children and young people. It happens everywhere in the world.
Left: Young Chinese praise Mao with the little red book in hand. Photo China Australia Consult.
Middle: Young Arabs from Gaza in Hamas training camp are preparing for the attack on Israel and the Jews. Photo Breitbart screenshot.
Right: Young brainwashed Danes in demonstration in Malmoe for political correctness. "Never again macho pigs". Foto Uriasposten.
All the young women that the author has known in his life, who have completed studies as teachers, have come out from the study after a few years as convinced politically correct. They considered feminism as a matter of course, to love one's country as abominable nationalism, all asylum seekers they considered to be noble natives, on whom you should have compassion. White men should be ashamed of the evils of imperialism, loving our own people is racism and so on.
Candidates from the teachers' universities carry these attitudes on to the children in public primary schools that are being indoctrinated with the politically correct values. Therefore, young voters are usually very politically correct.
Posters and Grafitti in Classroom in the Free High School on Noerrebro in Copenhagen. Photo Uriasposten.
As one of his first actions as the first consul, Napoleon took control of the schools. "In the schools, it is my main goal to have a mean of directing the political and moral opinion," he said. "For as long as people as children are not being told, whether they should be republicans or monarchists, Catholics or atheists, so long the state will not be one nation." Napoleon had no ideas about cultural and racial diversity.
Napoleon was right. It must be quite natural for a nation to influence future generations with the nation's fundamental values. Only the modern advocates of political correctness in universities, schools and other educational institutions have taken the right to define the values themselves on behalf of the nation, thus influencing the young people in a particular political direction. In addition, the value complex "political correctness" is suicidal for a nation.
It is needless to say that the journalism school is among the most politically correct education institutions in the country.
Winston Churchill said in a speech in parliament in November 1947: "Many forms of government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Christian IV with the national council. During his long and disastrous reign, he was in constant in-fight with the council, who were opponents of his wars, especially the one in Germany. The king won - to the detriment of Denmark. His son Frederik III made the monarchy completely independent of the national council by introducing absolutism. This continued Denmark's historical decline, that particularly Christian IV had begun. Drawing from Glossarium Juridico-Danico.
We must fear that with the current mass democracy the European nations will be paralyzed, and they will not be able to shake off the muslim stranglehold on them. It will all go under in "love manifestations", peace marches, calls for increased integration and tolerance, statements that we must continue doing, as we usually do, and similar toothless actions, as we know them so well.
It is quite clear that pure autocracy or dictatorship nor are good systems. The Danish absolute monarchs have a great responsibility for the country's decline from a big power to a small insignificant European state. The dictator Adolf Hitler started in a dazzling way to overthrow the Treaty of Versailles and restore Germany's economy, but he lost touch with reality and brought disaster to the German people. Mao Zedong was a skilled guerrilla general, but later he destroyed Chinas economy and culture with his big leap forward and cultural revolution, costing the lives of millions.
Sovereigns work best when they are constantly looked over the shoulder and evaluated by well-qualified persons. The English Magna Carta of 1215 and the Danish king Erik Klipping's charter on the Danehof in 1282, we consider as the beginning of democracy. Here groups of perhaps around 25-30 barons and great men, who had the right and duty to look the ruler over his shoulder and intervene in case of irregularities, had responsibility.
The age development of the right to vote in Denmark - Wikipedia.
In the Danish constitution of 1849, only unpunished and economic independent men over 30 had the right to vote to parliament. Only in connection with the constitutional amendment in 1915 servants and other employees got the right to vote. In 1908 women were given the right to vote. The electoral age was steadily lowered from the 30 years in 1849 to the present 18 years.
Women live in their feelings and dreams, and they are the foundation of political correctness. The greatest disaster for the peoples of Europe was that young women were given the right to vote.
The Danish Youth Council recommends 16 years old's right of voting: "If young people can vote, they will mature, and they will want to participate in democracy." The left-wing newspaper, Information, believes that young people have a kind of human right to vote: "Why should Danish youth be placed democratically inferior to other European youth?" A professor at Aalborg University, Johannes Andersen, also believes that the right to vote will mature and educate the young people - apparently, he believes that there is a need for it: "It will be the improvement of our democracy, alone by the fact that more would be a part of it." There is no mention of what qualifications the young people should have, and what they may contribute.
The Danish left-wing political parties, Socialist People's Party, The Radical Left, The Unity List, the Alternative and many Social Democrats - including Mogens Lykketoft - are supporters of 16 years right to vote. It is easy to see that this would dilute the modern mass democracy further to a mere joke, and it will probably destroy itself shortly after. The newly appointed voters will be even more politically correct than the slightly older teenagers, who already have voting rights; Moreover, they will be even easier for journalists and teachers to manipulate.
The Myth of the Rational Voter by Bryan Caplan.
In fact, the more immature, ignorant, irrational and unmotivated voters, who are involved in democracy, the less democratic it will be; Because it will make it even easier for media, teachers, career politicians and international manipulators to control Plato's voter-animal.
In Holland and France lock, stock and barrel voted in 2017, while in the United States only people, who had registered beforehand, voted. Therefore, the American voters were better decision-makers, leading to Trump's victory, while Wilders and Le Pen lost.
A limited company's board of directors is not elected by the company's office helpers, night shifts and toilet guards, it is maned with such members, who have relevant experience, knowledge of management and the company's business and financial or personal interest in the company's existence. In modern times, it happens very rarely that a really large shareholder company goes bankrupt, indicating that it is a good system. An experienced - though few in numbers - management can keep an organization on track with the general overall decisions.
We can send a thought to the early Danish developers and contractors, for example, brewer J.C. Jacobsen, who founded Carlsberg, A.P. Moller, who founded the shipping line, and C.F. Tietgen, who founded Danisco and many other companies. Together with the other business owners of the time they were very national minded and wanted their companies to benefit Denmark. They could have been candidates for some sort of national council if they had still existed.
However, today's Danish listed public limited companies are owned by a host of rapidly changing international investors, who have no special interest in Denmark. The management is only responsible to shareholders and has only one objective: to increase shareholder wealth.
In ancient Athens, only free men who had undergone the military training had the right to vote.
One of the author's friends has suggested that the nation's political leadership could be improved by that only persons who have an office, which means they are managers of a certain number of employees, should have the right to vote. The point is that men and women, who are used to being responsible for others, will take their voting rights more seriously, while at the same time they will be better qualified; In addition, a reduced number of voters will increase the individual's responsibility.
However, one can fear that many of those will have a career position in a large international company, and this will affect their decisions.