In our democracy—for we are no longer a republic that upholds individual rights and limits central power—you vote not for the representative who will defend your inalienable, individual rights.
Rather, if you are The Rich—whom the left treats as a reified, rigid state-of-being—you vote defensively. If you are The Poor, you vote extractively—you empower your guy to steal The Other Guy’s stuff and hand it over.
Elections are when the politically dominant majority gets to thump the politically weak minority.
The Moron Media, left and right, are sticking to their story. Barack Obama had “out-hustled” Mitt Romney. Obama ran a better “ground game.” He triumphed “in the trenches,” “neutralized” his rival. He had not stopped campaigning since 2008. The president’s mega-machine was unbeatable, even though his vision was lacking. (As I like to say, a visionary bureaucrat is a voracious one. The best leader is one who leads in limiting his leadership.)
Had Romney, say some of the analysts, been a better tactician, scrappier, less of a patrician—he’d have won.
The media so arguing has advocated for immigration policies that have helped, over the decades, to replace the American people with a new, vastly different people. Although whites broke for Romney in a big way—as a proportion of the voting public, the founding majority is teetering on minority status. It has shrunk to the point where it is becoming powerless against a coalition in opposition.
As an extension of their life’s work, the “news” people aforementioned have anointed a string of progressive commentators who are distinguished from the Democrats with whom they cavort in studios in one way only: They call themselves Republicans.
This lot’s line on the Republicans’ Nov. 6 defeat went as follows: Be nicer to the axis of Asians, blacks, browns (and brown-nosing bimbos) who handed the Democrats a handy victory. In a word, neutralize the D-Bomb.
For years, those of us who’ve warned about demographics have been dubbed racists. But the D-Bomb has dropped. Its debris is scattered across “the field” upon which Mitt Romney said he “left everything.” Asians, blacks and Latinos united for Obama.
As always, women voted with their wombs, although married sisters were less wild for big daddy O. (Oh, how we suffer for the female suffrage! I once vowed to “give up my vote if that would guarantee that all women were denied the vote.”)
To the pox of the 19th Amendment—it granted women the vote—add the 26th Amendment. Smuggled into the Constitution by statute, it artificially swelled the ranks of Democratic voters by millions of 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds. While they don’t work for a living, the vote grants youngsters a claim on the livelihood of those who do.
Overlapping voter categories notwithstanding, Obama thus curried favor with females—single ladies, in particular—the faithless, kids and minorities. Put differently, those earning less than $50,000 trended Barack Obama; those earning more than $50,000, and certainly individuals in the upper-income tax bracket, preferred Mitt Romney.
People with higher incomes constitute a minority, an economically dominant minority (to paraphrase Amy Chua). People with low incomes are in the majority, a politically dominant majority. The rich are politically impoverished; the poor politically rich. The rich dominate the economy, the poor dominate the polity. Come election time, the politically powerful exact their revenge against the economically powerful.
What kind of a right gives one man control over another man’s life? In a democracy, the right to vote does just that.
As for demographics; they have become destiny. They were not necessarily so. Demographics have been the excuse central planners have advanced to persevere with immigration policies that destroy civil society and shore up the welfare state.
The now-waning West became great not because it outbred the rest of the world. The West was once great because of its human capital—innovation, exploration, science, philosophy; because of superior ideas, and the willingness to defend such a civilization, not because it was more populated than the rest of the world.
America doesn’t need more people; it needs better people.
Making nice with constituencies that vote repeatedly and habitually for the candidate who promises them more stuff is tantamount to sleeping with the enemy. The only voters who could be swayed by the promise of the free market are the Democratic Party’s Asian supporters, since they enjoy higher incomes and stabler families than the party’s Hispanic and black devotees.
Ultimately, elections are about perception—the way in which the people perceive the political planks of the two parties. The American people perceive the Democratic Party as the party of entitlements. They think of the Republican Party as the party of austerity.
History and reality tell us that both parties have grown government into the gigantic, intractable, wealth-gobbling Thing that it is. But in the age of reality TV, reason and reality are meaningless. Perception is everything.
The idea of an American People is yet another misconception. The extravaganza that had one adorable, carrot-topped kid bawling “no more ‘Bronco Bamma’ and Mitt Romney, please” has ended. But if this advance auction of stolen goods—H. L. Mencken’s definition of an election—proved anything, it is that America is a mass of competing factions. Some vie to keep more of their rightful property; others fight to get their paws on that very property.
And the tipping point has arrived. This, Nov. 6, 2012 has proven.
©2012 BY ILANA MERCER
WND & RT
CATEGORIES: Democracy, Democrats, Demographics, Elections, Immigration, Private Property Rights, Republicans, The State & Statism, The West, Welfare State