The greatest failure of Democracy is in empowering the incapable and immoral. This brings the wretches into an unfair conflict with moral and just people over power. Armed with this evil, the immoral wretches slash at righteous good, before good knows what hit it. Democracy breeds naïveté towards the human condition, leaving these good and upstanding people vulnerable; easy victims for those devoid of conscience and virtue; those who always seek out material wealth no matter the cost.
But how do you identify such wretches of society? Firstly by vice alone; not that any man is vice-free, he should at least aim towards virtue (to err is human), and not be drowning in vice. For if he is, he has fallen to the insatiability of material pleasure. This is a bottomless abyss which cannot be filled; a hole in the heart which swallows up girthy portions of dopamine-releasing debauchery, always leaving the degenerate madman in search of his next exposure. These power dynamics are antithetical to civilization. This is like having a nation run by drug addicts. How would that fare? In the past, degenerates didn’t exercise their de jure political power, even with communists and socialists pleading with them and recruiting them: degenerates simply did not care.
Today, degenerates realize that they can use political power to fund ever more degeneracy than before, and so these parasites drink deeply on the civilizational lifeblood. They grow more numerous each day and will not stop. They drink until there is no more, and having been so bound to the host, will wither and die along-with. In the end, these degenerates are dead; any alternative proposition, so long as it results in their survival (assuming a desire to reduce or avoid death) is preferable to degenerates having power. Outside of the degenerate urge to destroy, nothing is gained by handing them power. Billions of lives hang in the balance.
Much of the developing world relies heavily on the high productivity of the industrial power farms in the developed world, without which starvation on unimaginable scales would sweep across the planet, resulting in untold chaos and an unfathomable loss of life. It would be immoral to allow so many such a horrid fate for the cause of rampant vice. If one has a heart and soul within them, one must do whatever one can to prevent this disaster.
So how do you know if you are right to act? What can you draw upon to willfully move with purpose? If you fail to figure out a way, you will soon be standing in the ashes of a billion souls and asking their ghosts what being entails. It depends on your values. When Balian of Ibelin asked what Jerusalem was worth, Saladin replied: “Nothing…Everything.” (line from the film Kingdom of Heaven). Jerusalem itself was not any sort of strategic location, and held little material value. However the immaterial value of the city, the spiritual value, was priceless. Why? Objective measure cannot discern this, yet objective, secular science lays claim to revelation and truth. Still the account is immeasurable, unquantifiable, lost to science.
This is the reality in which we live, and the power of Jerusalem is in its narrative space. It is a civilizational reference point, a real physical place, and cannot be copied or reproduced. It is authentic so long as the narrative persists, and like a candle in the wind, mankind trundles forth with its Jerusalems in hand, navigating the darkness; the lonely lights pressing forth through aged and cracking hands, while demons hiss and spit at the flame, trying as they can to beckon a shadowy gloom. Should one be passive towards such demons? No! “Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” -Dylan Thomas
We, the capable, must be strident, vociferous in our goals! We mustn’t allow for the drowning shadows to eliminate our progeny! Passivity is our death by suicide! Jarring though it is for our spineless, faint-hearted postmodern types to suddenly hear, we must judge accurately and violently throw aside our rose-tinted glasses! The enemy feigns strength and sings loudly, but it’s a farce driven by vice alone; they sound like they sing for power but cry out for release from their suffering in chains. Their sounds scream through their mortal coils and beckon forth the good and noble for righteous Justice! If you wish to be Christ-Like then start doing his work and face these prisoners of material degeneration.
We elect our leaders at every turn, and each vote is a secular prayer for absolution; in return we are rebuked and punished for our naïve weakness and frailty in failing to solve our own problems. We cannot blame the politicians, we the electorate are to blame for we too are incapable. We no longer choose leaders based on their virtues, but our vices. We damn ourselves from the start with weak and faithless hearts. Before we can hope to clear our the immoral democratic system, we must clear out the democracy within ourselves.
That being said, any human body run by committee (like a democracy) would be in much the same state, close to death. It will take the will of the mind to repair the degenerate chaos, to make whole the body and nation. A Monarch, a human head of state as the face of the country is preferable and more ideal than this mob-rule “democracy”. Even if we consider that both a mob and monarch can be corrupt, evil, immoral, or unjust, it is far simpler to right a wrong King, than an unruly, incorrigible mob. But lo! Must the King be imbued with moral knowledge and know he can be held to account by a higher power? Yes, and a mob can never be. It is a necessary part of power for it to not create itself as a simulacrum of God. Woe to those who have faith in mobs, for it is a short and brutal life in the worship of materialism, whilst a King is never wanting for he owns all, thus his nation is a reflection of him, while the mob is an indignant abyss.
Even the filtered and curated history which we are permitted to view shows a cycle from mob to Monarch, wherein the nation gains wealth and power, to the point where the mob gets uppity and deposes the Monarch. This kills real prosperity and so this mob surfs the corpses of their ancestors to ruin. Arriving there they discover themselves in a materialistic hell, and eventually one great man comes to rise into power and in this apocalypse they become King. True this man is King of the Ashes but a King nonetheless, and from his direction and drive things improve. This drive from below, a King of Ashes and then the King of Marble, is essentially possible because the King possesses the moral and ethical strength to do so. Where Kings fail in history, they fail because they act immorally and do not think about the greater national project. They succumb to the mob-desires, the animalistic, anti-civilizational forces which the mob cannot repel; only man can, even though a man is weak and pathetic, lowly, wretched, irreverent; despite this it is the only way forward for advancing civilization. There is a reason why people used to pray for Queens and Kings.
It is not in our nature to reject temptation. We are evolved or have an instinct for gluttony (ceteris paribus). The more accessible we make the objects of our desires, the more we must possess the will to reject excess and needless waste. Not because we don’t want it, but because it weakens us, it ruins us; whether by our own hands or from outside. The psychology of the mob is not one to reject plenty, it’s not one to self-moderate, and so will nearly always give-in to excess.
The unwillingness of the mob to sacrifice for the greater whole, is evident. Even when one mobbite democrat sacrifices (as rare as that may be), it is done to signal complicity and virtue towards the mob, with a genuine self sacrifice being rather absent. It is simply not performed if the performance is unseen, and as society descends further, it will be performed less and less, soon not at all. In contrast a King can say no, a King can say enough is enough and end whatever nonsense is present once and for all.
The capacity for a King to say enough, whilst a mob is incapable, establishes the two as eternal rivals. This is however mostly one-sides with the King eventually being run-off by the mob, to begin the descent, and then the King arising once again to rebuild and bringing civilization back into ascension. This, the historical narrative within a cyclical vision of history, establishes the Mob as the narrative antagonist, with the King playing the protagonist who rebuilds from the ashes.
This of course assumes that the cause of civilization is positive in our view. I admit this is not everyone’s view, but for the most part it is mine. With that, the linear or Whig view of history is clearly wrong. Things do not, and never have always bettered. Things wax and wane with the ebbing and flowing of will and desire. For that to change we would need to change human nature, which is a failed enterprise.
But if descent and collapse is inevitable, due to the deposition of the King, could the collapse be halted with a Herculean effort of will through the enthronement of a talented Monarch, thus avoiding the stages of collapse such as the loss of knowledge and custom, the swimming in the ashes from which a King would arise anyways? Could we avoid the inevitable by thwarting the slide mid-way? Perhaps we can. Perhaps that’s impossible. But whence has it been tried before? Could it be a civilizational shortcut? Or short circuit? God only knows.