Democracy: the God that failed

lewrockwell.com ^ | November 12, 2001 | Hans-Hermann Hoppe

[weikel]

19th century america had the highest standard of living.

[tallhappy]

The title is a variation of the classic book about Communism's abject failure called "The God that Failed."

These Lew Rockwell guys don't even try to hide their anti-American communist bent anymore.

[Aurelius]

Amazon.com

Democracy-The God That Failed : The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy, and Natural Order

by Hans-Hermann Hoppe (Hardcover - May 2001)

Usually ships in 2-3 days

List Price: $44.95

Our Price: $44.95

[Aurelius]

communist?

You must have an unusual conception of communism.

[sinkspur]

19th century america had the highest standard of living.

From what dark crevice on your body did you pull that little jewel?

Rockwell is becoming an enemy of America.

[Phantom Lord]

The God That Failed (by Metallica)

Pride you took
pride you feel
pride that you felt when you'd kneel

not the word
not the love
not what you thought from above

it feeds
it grows
it clouds all that you will know
deceit
deceive
decide just what you believe

I see faith in your eyes
never your hear the discouraging lies
I hear faith in your cries
broken is the promise, betraya
l the healing hand held back by the deepened nail

follow the god that failed

find your peace
find your say
find the smooth road in your way

trust you gave
a child to save
left you cold and him in grave

it feeds
it grows
it clouds all that you will know
deceit
deceive
decide just what you believe

I see faith in your eyes
never you hear the discouraging lies
I hear faith in your cries
broken is the promise, betrayal
the healing hand held back by the deepened nail

follow the god that failed

I see faith in your eyes
broken is the promise, betrayal
the healing hand held back by the deepened nail

follow the god that failed

pride you took
pride you feel
pride that you felt when you'd kneel
trust you gave
a child to save
left you cold and him in grave

I see faith in your eyes
never you hear the discouraging lies
I hear faith in your cries
broken is the promise, betrayal
the healing hand held back by deepened nail

follow the god that failed

As a side note, I saw Metallica perform this song the first time it was ever performed live.

[Verax]

I agree with some points...

Democracy has transformed the limited wars of kings into total wars. The motive for war has become ideological – democracy, liberty, civilization, humanity. The objectives are intangible and elusive:

and disagree with others...

Presidents and prime ministers come into their position as a result of their efficiency as morally uninhibited demagogues.

Personally, I'm stickin' with The Republic...One Nation under God, 'till the end!

[dirtboy]

Democracy has transformed the limited wars of kings into total wars. The motive for war has become ideological – democracy, liberty, civilization, humanity. The objectives are intangible and elusive:

You agree with this statement? It's idiotic - wars have become larger because of the Industrial Revolution and increased populations - and generally, democracies do not wage war on each other - the great wars of the last century were started by monarchies or fascist states.

[germanshepherd]

Can't agree with this. Here's how I see it at present:

#1 Democracy is not God. There is only one God. Democracy is one of the closest things we have on earth to God's government in heaven.

#2 Democracy is not a god. A god is something/someone (other than the one and only God) which is worshipped, adored -- falsely; an idol, a false god. If we worshipped democracy I guess that would make it a false god. But we do not worship democracy. Democracy enables us to worship God (or whatever else we choose to worship) freely, without interference. IMHO.

PS Nice screen name.

[SteamshipTime]

Which republic would that be?

[sayfer bullets]

" I always feeeeeel like....somebody's waaatching meeeeeeeeee.... AND I HAVE NO PRIVACY!"

- Rockwell

[Entelechy]

You agree with this statement? It's idiotic - wars have become larger because of the Industrial Revolution and increased populations - and generally, democracies do not wage war on each other - the great wars of the last century were started by monarchies or fascist states.

I think Hoppe would argue that fascism is a variant of democracy. Fascism dispenses with voting as a means of conferring legitimacy on the rulers and uses mass rallies instead. The basic operation of the various fascist states was essentially like a democracy -- political leaders chosen by demagogic skill rather than heredity, tendency towards huge bureaucracy and heavy govt. spending ("capital consumption" as Hoppe puts it) and most of all disintegration of civilized morals brought on by legal uncertainty.

[dirtboy]

I think Hoppe would argue that fascism is a variant of democracy.

I think Hoppe needs to get out more often.

[Entelechy]

It's not as radical a conclusion as you think. Hitler was elected and the Nazi's enjoyed widespread public support right up until the very end.

[beckett]

Historians qua historians cannot answer such questions, and no amount of statistical data manipulation can change this fact. Every sequence of empirical events is compatible with any of a number of rival, mutually incompatible interpretations.

Hogwash. This is the kind of thing somebody says when the empirical data doesn't suit his hypothesis. The guy is a wack-job.

[dirtboy]

It's not as radical a conclusion as you think. Hitler was elected and the Nazi's enjoyed widespread public support right up until the very end.

The Soviet Union held elections as well. The point is, when Hitler became chancellor there was no Nazi Germany, no fascist state - he created those over time, and the elections became more and more meaningless. And even if you want to continue to split hairs to keep that point, what of Japan and Germany under the Kaiser? Those were monarchies and they started major wars. The whole premise that democracy leads to large-scale war is one of the more idiotic ones I have seen in some time. If you want a good analysis of the demographic and economic factors that created the major wars of the 20th century, I suggest reading the beginning of Barbara Tuchmans The Guns of August.

[billbears]

Personally, I'm stickin' with The Republic...One Nation under God, 'till the end!

That's the problem, however. We are no longer a republic, haven't been one for ages (well exactly 141 years but who's counting?). Under a Republican form of government, the public votes for a group, that being the legislatures, who in turn would vote for the federal government officials. The Founders, decided to give the public a little more power than most republics and we were constitutionally allowed to vote for the US House of Representatives (well until the 17th Amendment and that was meant to take the last vestige of power out of the hands of the state legislatures, but of course it is easier to control a mostly uneducated mass known as the 'people', rather than 50 state legislatures). At no time, by the Constitution was the general public supposed to or should vote for the US Senate and the POTUS. Technically, under the original Framers intent, each state legislature nominated two of their own to be in the Senate and also to vote for the POTUS. Popular vote for the President was meant to give the legislatures an idea of how the people within their state would vote but by no means was legally binding. That changed over the years forcing the legislatures to follow the masses, hence this nation has been blessed with idiots such as FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton

No, we are a Socialist Democracy...at best

[rdb3]

That depends on who you are talking about.

[mlocher]

thanks for this provocative post. interestingly enough, i think that hans and i want freedom. however, i disagree with his means to ensuring we have a government that guarantees freedom.

myth 1... the emergence of states has caused subsequent economic and civilization progress

we only need to study the romans to learn that this is not a myth. barbaric tribes brought the roman empire to its knees. without a strong state that ensures national security there will be no investment leading to economic improvement because the outsiders will gather the fruit of one's toils.

myth 2...there is near-universal agreement that democracy represents an advance over monarchy

democracy is an advance over monarchy. absolute monarchs keep their subjects in poverty, while tolerating a nobility class that help keep the peace and help bring wealth. democracy is responsible for the improvement of the human condition in western civilization.

as hans correctly points out, democracy does not guarantee freedom. democracy merely allows people to get the government that they deserve (er, i mean vote for). when the citizens do not understand democracy or are afraid to defend democracy, they will lose freedom, as happened in germany, italy and other cited situation. [nazi germany started out as a democracy, but quickly moved to a dictatorship as hitler solidified absolute power with a set of elitist rulers. the people of germany, who revere authority, for whatever reasons, did not stand up and by tacit approval allowed hitler the power he obtained.] nazi germany was a step from democracy to rule by the elite few.

myth 3 ... there is no alternative to western style democracies [to guarantee freedom]

his arguments backing the debunking of this myth ring hollow. replacing elected officials with an elite ruling class will result in a dictatorship. absolute power corrupts absolutely. sooner or later there will be corruption.

communism was supposed to be socialist system ruled by an elite few guaranteeing egalitarianism. history shows what has happened to our communist pals.

western style democracy is the only government that can guarantee the freedom of the citizens. as hans states, there are problems with it -- but throwing it out is not the answer. unfortunately, because of racism and those who would otherwise limit the freedom of others (thievery, crime, etc.), the government must put in place rules to ensure that the rule of the majority do not violate the rights of the minority. in the united states we have defined a set of laws that undergird our constitution and also have a bill or rights dictating what each of us can do.

to stay in power, our elected officials must bribe the voters with various government programs. this sad fact does state that a free democracy will move to a socialist democracy. this is not a state i desire.

unfortunately, we do not have an economic bill of rights. our government can tax, implement socialist programs and implement welfare programs. it is too easy for our government to raise taxes, and this does what the barbarians of an earlier era does: keeps people from wantint to invest in economic progress.
we need an economic bill of rights that limits how much taxing and spending our government can do. tax limits should be set and a balanced budget must be guaranteed. this has the further benefit of limiting how much our elected officials can bribe their way to office.

democracy is not the scourge of freedom, rather it is its friend. freedom is only guaranteed with a strong government that guarantees security. economic growth comes by allowing those who invest to reap their rewards. our constitution requires some changes to ensure we do not move further into a socialist democracy.