Rule of the Many

Throughout my daily routine I always make it a point to check out more conservative sites and forums, mainly because if I read only liberal ones I'll always see things the way I want to see them. Reading sites such as Redstate and ProtestWarrior (although their forums are down) one really gets a sense of why they believe what they and others do. I rarely ever post any responses since arguing online is usually a waste of time and nothing other than animosity comes from it. The other day though I just couldn't help myself.

On election day, while cruising for opinions on our local elections, I came across a thread where a poster was spewing the same drivel that I normally see, but decided not to let it slide. He was all over the conservative spectrum, going off on poor people taking his hard earned money through taxes, Kerry not serving any real time in Iraq while Bush was a war hero, etc.

I responded curtly, telling him to strap on a pair and to quit whining because society has contributed more to him that he'll ever be able to contribute back. I also threw in a cue from the evangelical defense and commented on his avatar (a guy pounding a stick in his hand) and his apparently "touch guy strength" and that it must have been one of those books on the decency of humanity like the Bible that called for the strong to protect the weak. I haven't checked back for any responses yet, because I know what he'll say and it'll just turn into YASIA (Yet Another Stupid Internet Argument), although am going to post tomorrow with a comment of "Oh sorry it took me so long to get back, I was busy celebrating sweeping Congress".

Which leads me to my main point, currently I'm reading two pieces of socialist propaganda; Common Sense by Thomas Paine and Democracy & Revolution by George Novack. The first should be know to any American who's familiar with our countries history, while the second not so much. They fit together well though, with Novak dedicating the book to Thomas Paine and referencing the bulk of Common Sense in his forward. Coincidentally I bought them at the same time but didn't realize this until after I started reading them.

These two points meet up because that is what democracy is, the rule of the many over the rule of the few, or if you want to look at it this way, the rule of the strong over the rule of the weak. Of course it doesn't work exactly like that since democracy is about ideas and not physical strength. This does however lead to an interesting conclusion about the capitalist vs socialist economic system. If Democracy is the rule of many over the few, then why is it paired with a system that promotes the rule of the few over the many (through "survival of the fitness")? The two are ideologically black and white, and it seems a dictatorship or monarchy would go better with capitalism.

In the whole scheme of things, conservatives love to chastise the weak but then hold the flag of democracy, whose strength protects the weak, to their chests. That's not the way it works fellas, good bye.