03-13-2008, 03:44 AM
B"H
Happy Purim.
Happy Pi Day.
Hello. Thank you for reading my thread. I intend to discuss "democracy" and the potential problem that it could, under the wrong conditions, present. I do not intend to make this political. I have the utmost respect for the system of democratic participation. And, it is against Torah law to disrespect the given system of an Exile Nation. As it is, I live in the United States, a Constitutional Republic that has been labeled, somewhat inaccurately, as a "democracy." My gratitude to this country is tremendous.
As I stated, I have total respect for our system of government when it is in the hands of an enlightened electorate. Its Founders hoped that it would be. I sincerely hope that it would be as well. However, the example of the German people in 1933 presents a paradox when it comes to democracy. The German people FREELY AND DEMOCRATICALLY elected the N*zis to power. A free people chose a Tyranny. And, such a Tyranny it was! Unlike a democracy, a Republic, or a Constitutional Monarchy, the N*zi Regime was a totalitarian state in which no personal liberty could be deemed a personal right. All freedom was enjoyed at the behest of the "Fuhrer", to be revoked at any time.
One of the very first acts that the National Socialists committed was to murder Autistic children wholesale, along with others deemed to be genetically inferior. This wholesale murder occurred before any such murder was committed against Jews, Gypsies, or political dissidents. Unlike those other atrocities, this particular crime was never covered up. It may well have had the tacit and overt support of the German people, raised as they were on Social Darwinist propaganda.
And, where did the National Socialists get the idea of sterilization? No, it could not have been the Land of the Free, the Home of the Brave, because we are a good and a moral people! Well, may I suggest that you do a search on the Buck v Bell precedent. Oliver Wendell Holmes spoke for the Majority on the Supreme Court when he upheld the sterilization in the United States, the "Land of the Free" as we have called it. Many States had sterilization laws up until very recently. This was all to protect the gene pool, mind you. When the N*zis cited precedents to uphold their policy of compulsory sterilization, they did not invoke some repressive regime. Rather, they cited examples from the United States of America.
Democracy does automatically not lead to the correct choices. No form of democracy can. Whether we are referring to liberal democracy or its majoritarian alternatives, democracy as a system is just that; a system. Majorities can be wrong if they are misled---and if they willingly allow themselves to be misled. And, no less an Authority than the Torah states very clearly that man must not follow a majority to commit evil (Exodus 23:2). This is a very clear admonition to avoid being misled by a massive crowd, a marching drum beat, or a philosophy for which all of the sophisticated intellectuals fall. What is popular is not always right. And, what is right is almost never popular during the lifetimes of the righteous.
Only after the righteous have been martyred is their cause vindicated. At that point, their cause becomes a righteous standard. Their cause was never respected during their lives. Do you understand what the Torah means when it forbids following a majority to commit evil? It does not mean that we break laws that democratically elected legislatures make. It does not mean that we fail to respect the sovereignty of the people. What it means is that we do not worship any system of government, even as fine a system as a democratic Republic in the hands of an enlightened electorate.
Freedom can only be maintained by rational thinkers. "Rational" does not mean rationalist or atheistic. "Rational" means that issues are debated in a spirit of tolerance and compassion. There is a difference between this type of "enlightenment" and the big "E" enlightenment that influenced so many eighteenth century thinkers, some of our own Founders among them. (Jefferson, Paine, Franklin) The big "E" Enlightenment could not bring itself to understand that man has a need to Believe that is deeper than Science, deeper than Mathematical Platonism, "Symmetrical Mathematics", and deeper than the Rationalism that Jefferson mistakenly thought the new Republic would embrace.
The Big "E" Enlightenment could not face irrationality, its own or that of others. Look at those intellectuals who opposed H*tler. Most of them were Leftists. In a sense, they were rational disciples of the Enlightenment who stood up to the totalitarian manifestation of that same Enlightenment. One wing of the Enlightenment, humanitarianism, stood up to the dark side of rationalism, that predicated the scientifically methodical elimination of whole peoples. Sadly, however, the humanitarians did not ground their opposition to the N*zis on something higher than mere idealism. They worshiped democracy and rationality, hoping that the mere force of ideas would triumph against totalitarianism. It never did, and most of the opponents of H*tler either fled or were killed.
The N*zis could murder because the prohibition against murder had been removed from the religious realm and placed in the merely moral realm. This was a triumph of the Enlightenment. Even the Deists could not embrace a G-d Who directly forbade murder. A Deity Who guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was one thing, but a G-d Who "forbade" was passe' by the 1700's, at least among the cafe set. Thus, murder was merely part of the moral law, not Divine Law. And, in some sense, by the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, "morality" became subject to human whim. Have you found Buck v Bell yet?
Mass murder was not merely a result of machine guns. World War I and II were made possible by the degradation of the human person. Eugenics was made possible by the degeneration of human feeling. And, all forms of Tyranny, religious and secular, are made possible by the loss of the belief that Man is created in the Divine Image. Religious tyrants invoke the image of man as a sinner who is divorced from G-d, and therefore justly enslaved. This is a perversion of Christian thinking, but one that the Churches have often allied themselves with. Yet, the secular tyrannies have been far worse than theocratic regimes. They have justified mass slaughter ("liquidation"), with intellectuals bowing down to them in awe.
I do not worship majority rule any more than any other system because that is a form of idolatry. I say that for both the socialist and capitalist forms of majority rule. I honor this system, I respect it, but I am not going to call any human philosophy the salvation of the world. I say this with all due respect to the Founders of the United States. Many Torah Principles were incorporated in to our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. The "Two Witnesses" rule is one such rule. Honest weights and measures would be another. (1) Yet, as John Adams pointed out, our system of government is only fit for a people who are going to make just and moral decisions based on Higher Law. It is not fit for any other.
If a majority decides to euthanize or to forcibly abort Autistics or any other group, it is then time to divorce oneself from the multitudes. It is at that point that we no longer have a people worthy of what the Founders bequeathed. Now, a people may be misled. However, it is the duty of a people not to be deceived. A people who are willingly deceived will loose their freedom and democracy. They will simply vote it away. And, frankly, I will not feel sorry for them.
I respect democracy, but I warn of its dangers if the people ever loose morality. Better a King inspired by Justice and Morality than an a-moral democracy, much as I am a republican and not a Monarchist. I assume that this thought will be controversial. Please understand that I believe that a democratic system is the best that man can devise. It surpasses all other human systems. I merely point out that it is a human system, and that a choice is democratically decided upon does not have the force of morality, merely that of agreement.
All the Best. Happy Purim.
(1) I have learned that Thomas Jefferson was a big force behind the adoption of the decimal system, based on the number "Ten". "Ten" is the basis of an attempt at honest weights and measures. At Sinai, of course, Ten Commandments were given. Thomas Jefferson did not believe in the Torah. However, I believe that the concept of just weights and measures influenced his thoughts in this regards. He fought for a society of yeomen farmers against speculators. See Andro Linklater, Measuring America, 2003.
Happy Purim.
Happy Pi Day.
Hello. Thank you for reading my thread. I intend to discuss "democracy" and the potential problem that it could, under the wrong conditions, present. I do not intend to make this political. I have the utmost respect for the system of democratic participation. And, it is against Torah law to disrespect the given system of an Exile Nation. As it is, I live in the United States, a Constitutional Republic that has been labeled, somewhat inaccurately, as a "democracy." My gratitude to this country is tremendous.
As I stated, I have total respect for our system of government when it is in the hands of an enlightened electorate. Its Founders hoped that it would be. I sincerely hope that it would be as well. However, the example of the German people in 1933 presents a paradox when it comes to democracy. The German people FREELY AND DEMOCRATICALLY elected the N*zis to power. A free people chose a Tyranny. And, such a Tyranny it was! Unlike a democracy, a Republic, or a Constitutional Monarchy, the N*zi Regime was a totalitarian state in which no personal liberty could be deemed a personal right. All freedom was enjoyed at the behest of the "Fuhrer", to be revoked at any time.
One of the very first acts that the National Socialists committed was to murder Autistic children wholesale, along with others deemed to be genetically inferior. This wholesale murder occurred before any such murder was committed against Jews, Gypsies, or political dissidents. Unlike those other atrocities, this particular crime was never covered up. It may well have had the tacit and overt support of the German people, raised as they were on Social Darwinist propaganda.
And, where did the National Socialists get the idea of sterilization? No, it could not have been the Land of the Free, the Home of the Brave, because we are a good and a moral people! Well, may I suggest that you do a search on the Buck v Bell precedent. Oliver Wendell Holmes spoke for the Majority on the Supreme Court when he upheld the sterilization in the United States, the "Land of the Free" as we have called it. Many States had sterilization laws up until very recently. This was all to protect the gene pool, mind you. When the N*zis cited precedents to uphold their policy of compulsory sterilization, they did not invoke some repressive regime. Rather, they cited examples from the United States of America.
Democracy does automatically not lead to the correct choices. No form of democracy can. Whether we are referring to liberal democracy or its majoritarian alternatives, democracy as a system is just that; a system. Majorities can be wrong if they are misled---and if they willingly allow themselves to be misled. And, no less an Authority than the Torah states very clearly that man must not follow a majority to commit evil (Exodus 23:2). This is a very clear admonition to avoid being misled by a massive crowd, a marching drum beat, or a philosophy for which all of the sophisticated intellectuals fall. What is popular is not always right. And, what is right is almost never popular during the lifetimes of the righteous.
Only after the righteous have been martyred is their cause vindicated. At that point, their cause becomes a righteous standard. Their cause was never respected during their lives. Do you understand what the Torah means when it forbids following a majority to commit evil? It does not mean that we break laws that democratically elected legislatures make. It does not mean that we fail to respect the sovereignty of the people. What it means is that we do not worship any system of government, even as fine a system as a democratic Republic in the hands of an enlightened electorate.
Freedom can only be maintained by rational thinkers. "Rational" does not mean rationalist or atheistic. "Rational" means that issues are debated in a spirit of tolerance and compassion. There is a difference between this type of "enlightenment" and the big "E" enlightenment that influenced so many eighteenth century thinkers, some of our own Founders among them. (Jefferson, Paine, Franklin) The big "E" Enlightenment could not bring itself to understand that man has a need to Believe that is deeper than Science, deeper than Mathematical Platonism, "Symmetrical Mathematics", and deeper than the Rationalism that Jefferson mistakenly thought the new Republic would embrace.
The Big "E" Enlightenment could not face irrationality, its own or that of others. Look at those intellectuals who opposed H*tler. Most of them were Leftists. In a sense, they were rational disciples of the Enlightenment who stood up to the totalitarian manifestation of that same Enlightenment. One wing of the Enlightenment, humanitarianism, stood up to the dark side of rationalism, that predicated the scientifically methodical elimination of whole peoples. Sadly, however, the humanitarians did not ground their opposition to the N*zis on something higher than mere idealism. They worshiped democracy and rationality, hoping that the mere force of ideas would triumph against totalitarianism. It never did, and most of the opponents of H*tler either fled or were killed.
The N*zis could murder because the prohibition against murder had been removed from the religious realm and placed in the merely moral realm. This was a triumph of the Enlightenment. Even the Deists could not embrace a G-d Who directly forbade murder. A Deity Who guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness was one thing, but a G-d Who "forbade" was passe' by the 1700's, at least among the cafe set. Thus, murder was merely part of the moral law, not Divine Law. And, in some sense, by the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, "morality" became subject to human whim. Have you found Buck v Bell yet?
Mass murder was not merely a result of machine guns. World War I and II were made possible by the degradation of the human person. Eugenics was made possible by the degeneration of human feeling. And, all forms of Tyranny, religious and secular, are made possible by the loss of the belief that Man is created in the Divine Image. Religious tyrants invoke the image of man as a sinner who is divorced from G-d, and therefore justly enslaved. This is a perversion of Christian thinking, but one that the Churches have often allied themselves with. Yet, the secular tyrannies have been far worse than theocratic regimes. They have justified mass slaughter ("liquidation"), with intellectuals bowing down to them in awe.
I do not worship majority rule any more than any other system because that is a form of idolatry. I say that for both the socialist and capitalist forms of majority rule. I honor this system, I respect it, but I am not going to call any human philosophy the salvation of the world. I say this with all due respect to the Founders of the United States. Many Torah Principles were incorporated in to our Declaration of Independence, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. The "Two Witnesses" rule is one such rule. Honest weights and measures would be another. (1) Yet, as John Adams pointed out, our system of government is only fit for a people who are going to make just and moral decisions based on Higher Law. It is not fit for any other.
If a majority decides to euthanize or to forcibly abort Autistics or any other group, it is then time to divorce oneself from the multitudes. It is at that point that we no longer have a people worthy of what the Founders bequeathed. Now, a people may be misled. However, it is the duty of a people not to be deceived. A people who are willingly deceived will loose their freedom and democracy. They will simply vote it away. And, frankly, I will not feel sorry for them.
I respect democracy, but I warn of its dangers if the people ever loose morality. Better a King inspired by Justice and Morality than an a-moral democracy, much as I am a republican and not a Monarchist. I assume that this thought will be controversial. Please understand that I believe that a democratic system is the best that man can devise. It surpasses all other human systems. I merely point out that it is a human system, and that a choice is democratically decided upon does not have the force of morality, merely that of agreement.
All the Best. Happy Purim.
(1) I have learned that Thomas Jefferson was a big force behind the adoption of the decimal system, based on the number "Ten". "Ten" is the basis of an attempt at honest weights and measures. At Sinai, of course, Ten Commandments were given. Thomas Jefferson did not believe in the Torah. However, I believe that the concept of just weights and measures influenced his thoughts in this regards. He fought for a society of yeomen farmers against speculators. See Andro Linklater, Measuring America, 2003.