Fjordman: Democracy: New Tools are Needed

Fjordman’s latest essay has been published at Democracy Reform. Below are some excerpts:

Currently, the democratic system is in my view not working properly in any Western country. It is more or less dead in Western Europe, where most of the real power has been transferred to the unelected organs of the European Union, anyway. Virtually all Western countries have lost control over their borders. This is not a sustainable situation. You can call your political system a democracy, a dictatorship, a republic, a monarchy or whatever you want, but a country that does not control its territory will eventually die. It’s inevitable.The situation is made worse by the fact that globalization of transportation has put severe pressure on our nations in a manner which was unthinkable only a few decades ago.

– – – – – – – –

When the first Christian Gospels were written down at the end of the first century AD, the population of the Roman Empire was about 60 million people. This mirrors the annual global population growth in the early twenty-first century. In other words: The global population grows by another Roman Empire every single year. Our system wasn’t designed for such numbers. It needs fundamental change, or it will soon collapse into civil wars or dictatorships or both. We also have a situation where some left-wing parties in particular deliberately import Muslims and others because they vote overwhelmingly for left-wing parties. A political system where it pays to import enemies obviously isn’t sustainable.

Read the rest at Democracy Reform.

6 thoughts on “Fjordman: Democracy: New Tools are Needed

  1. This post is closely related to the Baron’s previous post. It is true that hardcore left-wingers virtually control both the mass media and the education system throughout the Western world, and that any traditional viewpoint on European culture or morality is more or less banned by law. We have media who cheer for our enemies and demonize those defending our civilization. So do our centers of learning, the universities. I think this is unprecedented in human history.

    There is no real “conservative” opposition, Conservative Swede is right about that. Being a “conservative” now simply means that you implement the radical Leftist agenda, only at a slightly slower pace. Which is why in the USA, the Republicans have become what the Democrats were 40 years ago, and the Democrats have become a party for active subversion of their country and civilization. The Gramscian long march through the institutions has been a spectacular success.

    In modern warfare, one of the first things you do is bomb the enemy’s TV stations. This reflects the fact that those who control the media, and television in particular, control the country. Things aren’t true until you can see them on TV.

    Those who have read my essays since the beginning will probably see that my views have matured considerably. I no longer believe that the “blog revolution” alone will crush the mainstream media. I also no longer believe that we can “fix the system.” The system is beyond repair and will collapse at some point.

    That does not mean that we cannot make a difference. As others have said, history is almost always made by minorities. Our job here is to be that minority, to analyze what went wrong, what needs to be done and have an alternative ready when the time comes. This is challenging enough, but it can be done. Let us focus on what can be done.

  2. “Those who have read my essays since the beginning”

    Indeed, and you can not escape. You will be sucked every time more to the right (you’ll become Sarah Palin or more) and the crazy neo-nazis will become every more to the “right” that is, to where reason can stand. It’s inevitable.

    In 10~20 years time, we’ll all laugh at Charles Johnson like cases because it will become a) those who are for European Civilisation and b) those who are against.

    Of course, there will be different views and people more or less radical but we’ll all be radicalised to one point that we’ll all be allies or enemies independent if we agree or not.

    That’s how wars start. That’s what my cristal ball says will happen in a near future.

    I liked this essay but I am no democrat. No American will understand this and I am not expecting Europeans to understand this, yet, but two men are not the same. The president (a good president) vote cannot worth the same as the vote of the average rapist or unsuccessfull and unproductive citizen.

    This will lead to another rise of Nobility. In Russia for instance, some families control more and more of it. Unlike the U.S.A. where the possession of money dictates the amount of power, in a Nobility system, power will dictate who does and who does not get the money.

    I use the word Nobility in the infantile hope that those elites will be good and learned. In the good way that is… like a bullfighter.

  3. I’d like to float an idea.

    Scrap the one person one vote system and replace it with something like this:

    One person without real property (real estate) gets one vote.

    Increase your vote by fractions if you

    a) own property.
    b) have a farm or business.
    c) are responsible for minor children.
    d) are in active military service or are a veteran thereof.

    The list could go on but the idea is that stakeholders in a nation should have a greater say than those without.

    Property owners pay higher taxes.

    Owners of business and farms produce goods and services for the good of their communities and most often employ others.

    Parents should be able to express their interests on behalf of their children as well as themselves.

    Active military and veterans have made sacrifices for the good of the nation.

    These common sense ideas would reverse the leftward direction in six short years.

  4. How about temporarily “removing” the vote from people on the public dole, the idea being that if you are a ward of the state via public financing, you will return to a **possibly limited** condition of childhood.

    This could include any form of federal government spending, including both welfare and business subsidies.

    Once you are self sustaining, you will get your vote back.

    Thus, politicians will have less reason to pander to different segments of the population by promising them other peoples money.

  5. I believe most western nations have inanely restored the vote even to their jailed criminals so removing the vote from Welfare recipients is just not going to happen although it would be eminently sensible as bordergal argued for anyone becoming a “ward of the state” and therefore not in a moral position to direct the state.

    If the right to vote is important enough to this group, it would be further motivation to take on the adult responsibility of supporting oneself and one’s family. To restore a criminal’s franchise, he should be required to live a law abiding life for five years after getting out of jail.

    No one will act to curb Welfare either but this will happen willy nilly with the coming economic crash. Governments simply won’t have the money to lavish in exchange for votes.

Comments are closed.