By
Vickie Zisman
I have been thinking lately, what with the European refugee crisis and the self-professed gurus of doom and backlash (like Stefan Molyneux). And all of a sudden it struck me – I remembered our family saying that even in a fool’s words lies a grain of truth. Thus Molyneux turned the light on this chasm between the popular wishes and views in the European countries and their leaders’ enforced policy on the subject.
Personally, I have been having this uneasy feeling for some time now: the feeling of total condescending disregard, and maybe even downright contempt (see Angela Merkel) on the part of the politicians toward their indigenous population’s fears and concerns. Or the prevailing majority concept of their national character. It reminded me a lot of the Marie Antoinette attitude toward the ‘unwashed’! Or of any other monarch, for that matter. You see, our lives did not matter, our voices were never taken into account, unless made loud and clear by a sudden bang of a violent uprising……
But then, democracy emerged – the Rule of the People for the people. It was supposed to be all about us, the lawful majority. Our desires were to take precedence now, in a rational structured free mode of political process. The rulers now were accountable and replaceable every few years.
Or is it so? Then how come the Western people today sense that unintentionally and, contrary to the initial plot, they have traded one form of tyranny for another? Because de-facto, as discovered, there is no difference between the totalitarian monarchy and the modern democracy with regard to their wishes? How come that the trust in our politicians is at its lowest? How come that despite the choice we allegedly have, we still feel blatantly ignored and impotent to affect the course of our lives just a second after casting our ballot? How come that the people who rule us and were supposed to be part of us, in practice assume the same attitude as the blue-blood dictators of the past?
One may mock and disregard the popular self-professed Internet gurus, but they gain momentum, precisely due to the blind arrogant Icarus-like hubris of our political elites. They are in this fool’s paradise of shoving down our throats – accountability-free? – these unsustainable delirious socio-economic engineering ideas. All dysfunctional: be it multi-culturism or economic neo-liberalism. Even when those concepts are blowing up in our faces, our ‘leaders’, Titanic-style, go on denying the reality, dancing to their own tune, which only they can hear.
A wise acquaintance of mine, a proponent of Ayn Rand’s Objectivism, remarked not so long ago that direct democracy is a disaster. And I tend to agree with him. Personally, I do not subscribe to the wisdom of the crowds principle. However, sometimes the reality is the best teacher. If we don’t want to see the Frankenstein re-incarnation of the Third Reich descending on Europe on the wings of the grassroots’ smarts, then our politicians should re-connect themselves to facts and extract that grain of truth from the popular sentiment, to turn things around.
Otherwise, we should all practice the Fuhrer’s salute soon, following the mutiny of the not-so-silent-anymore guinea-pigs…or lab rats – all of us actually.
Ms. Vickie Zisman milks the cow on this short but to the point remark on western politics. Here in America as people laugh and sing (the Romans called it "bread and circus")the Republic has been taken over by "Bushinton." Yep, since 1980 it seems there has been a Bush or Clinton roaming the White House or occupying a lofty status such as Secretary of State. This smacks of "royalty" or some type of hereditary rule. Likewise we see that since 1980 these power corridors are dominated by the Harvard-Yale axis and everyone bows before the intellectual largesse of the "ivy-league." Yet when we hear students from these schools interviewed on issues they are strikingly ignorant and possess crazy ideas about eradicating the Constitution! Now we see Madam Hillary running on her experience in foreign affairs---experience that includes supporting radical Islam in the Balkans, ruining Libya, stoking the fires of ISIS, fumbling with Russia and China etc. But we are told it is "time" for a woman to be president. So why not a Clinton? Can it be coincidence that America's prestige and standing has been falling since the Bush-Clinton syndicate ( and yes Obama fits in here)took over the body politic?
Hi Mitchell, When the Midwest wills cease playing with their personal arms arsenal at local funfairs and rodeo shows, and open their eyes and minds to comprehend the reality you just so correctly described, maybe then a change can be effected. As long as the grass roots are sedated and kept at certain quiet minimum of bearable existence - no chance of that.