Stating with the understanding that all mandatory, human government is illegitimate, it is interesting (and perhaps important) to understand all the various forms of human government which abound or have existed on this poor planet of ours.

We do point out that, theoretically, a mandatory human government based on the fundamental of universal consent might – might – possibly be legitimate. But even that is unlikely, given Lincoln’s theorem: “You can fool ALL of the people some of the time, and some of the people ALL of the time, but not ALL of the people ALL of the time.” Government isn’t rolling dice, and how many times in a row can you get snake eyes before something else comes up? Even unanimous democratic government, especially when done in the form of a representative democracy, is virtually (99.9999%) certain to take away human liberty and responsibility.

We here at TPOL were just made away of a concept called “managed” or “guided” democracy. (Oddly enough, via a war game based on Warhammer 40,000.) According to some definitions:

A managed democracy (a/k/a guided democracy) is a system of government that holds formal elections but uses state power, media control, and bureaucratic rules to ensure the ruling elite always wins and keeps control. Key Characteristics include:

• Elections without change: People (“Citizens”) are allowed to vote, but “the government “controls who can be nominated, run, and win.
• State-controlled/allied media: The government uses propaganda and works closely or tightly runs news outlets (usually but not just “major outlets” to shape public opinion and silence undesired opposition voices. Often the major media is de facto an element of government (a “fourth branch”).
• Illusion of choice: The system maintains a democratic appearance to give those in power legality as “elected leaders,” while actually an authoritarian regime (usually somewhat concealed). True opposition people and ideas are either co-opted (twisted to conform) or suppressed.
• All this means that results of elections never alter core state policies. And the “power of the people” is an illusion.

Now this, we must admit, comes across both as making sense and as being rather strange… and just reinforces our extreme dislike of the entire concept of “democracy” here at TPOL.

Oddly enough, some online sources claim this is an science fiction exaggeration, hyperbole. Many sources, however, do give examples: modern Russia, Egypt, and the Philippines are all identified as modern “managed democracies.” And many claim that the United States’ FedGov is exactly this. The sources all make good arguments to support their claims.

Honestly, we here at TPOL cannot think of a single “democracy” in history with more than a few hundred or thousand souls that should not be classed as this type of democracy. It is of course just one of many ways that democracy is quickly and incredibly corrupted.

But we point out that a “directed democracy” is nothing more than a self-perpetuating oligarchy. And often, sooner or later, becomes an outright dictatorship: a collective leadership frequently comes under the control of a single strong man. For however that strong man can remain in power. (Similar, perhaps, to log-rolling?)

The entire premise of democracy is based on a fallacy that is as ignored as it is ubiquitous: that a majority is always right, and that a committee is somehow smarter and wiser than any individual. When tied to the idea that government has power over the lives of people that it should have, it creates a truly monstrous evil.

So what does this mean to lovers of liberty? It is more than just the tyranny of the majority, and how that so typically results in riding roughshod over individuals and their lives and liberty. It is more than just the cost of such “democratic institutions” or even the way money destroys the meaning of free elections in so many ways.

Democracy survives only by propaganda that extolls it and therefore government. The result is that government is made into an absolute essential for any society. For civilization. So anyone who advocates very limited government, much less anything close to “anarchy.” So democracy, however corrupted and twisted and full of faults, is proclaimed to be essential as well.

Which is why, as lovers of liberty, faced with a situation (which we are now in) that we cannot abolish mandatory human government, and must act wisely, a republic is far, far more tolerable. A republic, of whatever type, recognizes it must have limits and must recognize principles are not subject to popular vote, whether managed or not.

Think on these things.