Trump is Evidence that Democracy Works

Libs who claim to love democracy should respect his victory

If you’ve read much of my writing then you’ve likely seen me comment derisively about democracy at some point. Previously I’ve written a post arguing that the franchise should be limited. Technically I’m not opposed to democracy wholesale, I’m merely opposed to the current version of it where everyone gets to vote just for breathing. I think mass suffrage democracy is dumb and stupid and largely indefensible. Who should be able to vote? Well that’s a whole post of its own, isn’t it? The short version is, people who share my values should be able to vote, and people who don’t share my values should be disenfranchised.

That probably sounds stupid, evil and/or crazy to the average American reading this post. If you listen to how the average person with politics-brain talks about elections, though, it’s the only logical conclusion. People constantly freak out over the enormous, world-shaking ramifications of the next election, framing their opposition as existential threats. Every election I can remember has been “the most important election of our lifetimes.” Libs are especially bad about this! They have full-on mental breakdowns when Trump wins!

With that being the case, how could one possibly then turn around and say the country wouldn’t be better off if all of Trump’s supporters actually couldn’t vote to begin with, if you’re a lib (or vice versa if you’re a con)? It certainly seems to me that if everyone left of center couldn’t vote, the country’s politics would improve dramatically overnight. Looking back through my time here on Earth, I can confidently say that there was not one election I’ve been around for where there was any kind of difficult decision to be made between Democrat or Republican. However flawed they might be, Republican policies are far better than Democrat, and it’s by a lot.

If we could disenfranchise all leftists, the country’s politics would then turn into elections being a choice between two different coalitions of rightoids. Most likely, I imagine there would be a relatively more “classical liberal”/libertarian coalition versus a more religious one. Both of these options would be far superior to today’s Democrats who are full-scale insane clowns. Tons of wildly destructive garbage such as socialism, extreme climate hysteria, tranny stuff, etc., would be total non-starters with both of these parties. Each of the rightoid factions might have some areas where you disagree with them, but they’d at least maintain a basic connection to reality on many core issues, instead of being absolute lunatics on literally every single one.

Why, then, is the average person so absolutely insistent that everyone must vote, and that if you don’t think your enemies should vote then you’re probably a fascist or something? One explanation is that it’s kayfabe, since people like to at least try and appear non-partisan. Another is that people are simply following the Western civic religion. Everyone has to vote and also every election is the most important thing of all time. How do we reconcile these two contradictory beliefs? Well we just don’t think about it too much and shout down anyone who calls out the contradiction, that’s how. Classic human nature type stuff.

Alright, enough bashing democracy. The title of the post mentioned evidence that democracy works. This is where I’d like to focus on the sacred belief that everyone must vote, the tenet which I personally reject. The vast majority of people who aren’t me are extremely attached to this tenet. Why is it so important? Well, the narrative typically goes that legitimacy derives from the consent of the governed, and securing 50% + 1 votes in an election is our chosen method of measuring “consent.” Trump’s affront to this sacred belief after the 2020 election remains one of the most common talking points used against him.

One of my major complaints with this political model is that many things which are effectively decided via this “50% + 1” headcount method actually should not be up for a vote at all. In my view, most contentious issues that politics centers around today should not even be up for debate, they should be locked in place in a way similar to constitutional rights. You shouldn’t be able to just vote 50% + 1 that the country will no longer have a border, for instance. That should be insulated from the whims of the mob to the same degree as the First Amendment, at the very least.

The average person implicitly agrees with me about this on many issues, both on the left and the right. However, the way that our system works is that in effect, people do get to vote on all of this stuff by the standard of 50% + 1, whether we like it or not. Joe Biden got 50% + 1 votes (technically he got more than that, but you get the point—he got 51.31% of the popular vote) and that means that now there’s no border, the government will try to arbitrarily forgive billions of dollars of student loans, you are forced to take the COVID jab or lose your job, and tons of other insane stuff that should be illegal to even attempt.

But 51.31% of the people voted for it, so those of us who “lost” are expected to just take it all lying down, because that’s how Our Democracy works. That was the narrative under which Donald Trump has been declared Hitler 2.0 for trying to overturn that election. So guess what that means? That means that when the next time around Trumpler is the one who gets 50% + 1, well… you guys just have to take it all lying down, don’t you? That’s the standard, that’s Our Democracy. Everything is up for grabs, all the time; all it takes is the magical number, 50% + 1.

If you’re not a total partisan like me or someone whose brain has been completely rotted by TDS, and you actually think this is “the best system except for all the others,” then you should really be celebrating this electoral roller coaster as a triumph of how Our Democracy shapes governance. You see, there’s another advantage democracy grants, one which is more legitimate than the “consent of the governed” bullshit. The one big thing democracy has going for it is the ability to throw the bums out.

Joe Biden ran on a “return to normal” in 2020 and pitched himself as a moderate who would return normalcy and sanity to the country. If he had actually delivered on that, I imagine that he (or Madame Brat, same difference) might have been able to win re-election this year! But that’s not what he did, is it? And it seems like people noticed. The libs turned the gaslighting up to maximum brightness, spamming wordcel text walls about how ackchyually the economy is great and the president doesn’t control inflation and trannies don’t have an unfair advantage in sports because of these sixty-three academic stoodies and blah blah blah.

Enough normies noticed, though. They noticed that things didn’t go back to normal after all. They said to the libs “okay then, Trump.” Trump is a punishment to the ruling class for being terrible. He may be many other things, but at his core, I think this is one of his most fundamental features as a political actor. His entire rise to power has been fueled by dissatisfaction with liberal elites, that’s pretty obvious. Why haven’t the liberal elites been able to stop him?

Well, because everyone can vote. All those stupid proles get a vote that counts for exactly the same as Barack Obama or Kamala Harris. Oops! Probably shoulda factored that one in when you guys decided to oppose populism. That’s one of the most ironic things of all. The same people who denounce Trump for being a populist and say that populism is super duper bad are also the ones who constantly say “Our Democracy” and talk about how sacred it is and how terrible Drumpfler is for threatening it. Yeah, but “Our Democracy” grants mass suffrage equally to the entire population.

You really didn’t think that was going to end up in populism at some point? If anything it’s a miracle that it took this long to get there. So which one is it? Is it really sacred and important that literally everyone votes, or is it really terrible and awful to have populism which is driven by the whims of the low-IQ masses? Maybe what you really want is for all the proles to vote and to vote for all the things you like so you can have your cake and eat it too? Well, that option might not be on the table any longer. Probably should have behaved a bit better with all the power you had before things got to this point.

This is the forest that TDS libs are missing due to their obsession with Trump’s single tree. Donald Trump didn’t enter politics until he was a senior citizen. The people he’s running against have been in politics longer than most of us have been alive. People vote for Trump because they want an alternative to the status quo. The liberal elites were in charge of the status quo—not Trump. The liberal elites ruined it—not Trump. If they had simply been better stewards of said status quo, then there wouldn’t be such a critical mass of people desperately seeking an alternative.

This is exactly the sort of process you’d expect in theory for how democracy can produce better governance. Once a ruling faction becomes too corrupt and abusive, people use the ballot box to throw the bums out. Elections are not some kind of highly rational mechanism for producing enlightened policy outcomes, they’re an eject button that people can press on their rulers. It’s a threat to keep the rulers in line and this year the people used it. So instead of freaking out and spamming “How could anyone vote for Blumpftler?!?!!1!”, what the libs should really be asking themselves is “How did we screw this up so badly that people actually preferred Trump?” The fact that they can’t do that demonstrates exactly why the eject button was used to begin with.