#democarcy

#TheSimpsons

The second law of thermodynamics states that the level of disorder in any closed system cannot decrease. Unless there's some external influence, things can only get more and more messy.  The earth is not, by any mean, a close system, and therefore neither the biosphere nor human activities are in fact directly governed by the second law in the strict sense. Nevertheless, we can still formulate a version for this law of nature that is applicable to human societies: without a focused intervention everything shall get worse.

A democratic government is a synthetic thing. It was made; it didn't just evolve. The first system for a modern democratic rule was set up in the US of A during the late eighteenth century by its founding fathers. It was based on ideas by liberal European thinkers such as Locke, Rousseau and Montesquieu‏. Although the US was hardly a true democracy then – it legalized slavery and assigned voting rights to white men only – the system it procured still served as a template for all modern democracies hence: parliament, government and head of state (and potentially other public positions) elected by the general public according to the majority rule.

There is no perfect system of government. The US Americans, for instance, tried to construct a fair system, but it was rather naïve and it still contained many loopholes that could be exploited by some groups to increase their own political power on the expanse of other groups. Moreover, when certain people become powerful due to flaws in the system, they use this power to enlarge end deepen these advantageous defects, gaining even more power, and that allows them to increase yet again the inherent unfairness. This dynamic is common to all forms of government, not just in the US: barring a dramatic disruption or, alternatively, a continuous effort to counter decay, the imbalance and unfairness can only increase over time. It's the "second law" of sociodynamics.

Indeed, dramatic disruptions can occur. The US had a civil war. Germany fell into fascism and then was defeated and conquered in a world war. However, revolutions and total wars are rare, unpredictable and bloody. The only practical way to preserve a fair, liberal democracy it to fight for it relentlessly. The problem is, most people fail to understand this fact. They have this false vision of a democratic system as a stable structure, protected by its constitution and by its institutions. And because they don't take into account the second law of sociodynamics, they become passive subjects of the deteriorating system, ignorant with respect to the fundamental reasons all this is happening around them.

One of the resulting misconceptions is to regard conservative politics as representing just another ideological stance. In fact, those who lead the fight to conserve a faulty system are typically the ones who benefit mostly by it. And they have a built-in advantage, exactly because of these faults. It’s a positive-feedback vicious circle – the powerful have the power to preserve and magnify their power. The fact that they operate within a supposedly fair democratic system only help to obfuscate the actual dynamic behind the scene.

But it doesn't end here. There's another factor that make matters much worse than they could have been. The masterminds of modern democracy made a fatal mistake in their design. They stipulated that political power is allocated strictly based on majority. And this, as it turned out, is profoundly destructive.

Democratic governments profess to represent a "social contract", empowering it to rule for the benefit of the society as a whole. However, in effect, they frequently gain control that is only based on a small majority. For example, a governing coalition may have gained a very narrow majority of just 51% of the votes but obtained practically all the political power. Moreover, in a heterogeneous society, where political and ideological affiliations are rooted in rigid ethnical, religious or socio-economical divisions, the same parties can gain the electoral upper-hand repeatedly in every election. Constituents of minority groups, large or small, are being incessantly deprived of any significant influence on the national policy.

Minority groups suppression has far-reaching consequences. It undermines the very essence of the social contract as it leaves many citizens politically powerless. Consequently, the state can ignore their interests with impunity, make them outcasts, and, in extreme cases, even persecute them under the guise of a lawful democratic rule.

The "winner takes it all" scheme generates a constant socio-political tension, hatred between rival political tribes and deep frustration that often leads to violence. Such social disintegration can be observed in democratic countries all over the world. Politics became a zero-sum game, and it's fucking up our societies and, eventually, our lives.

But what can be done? Is there any other fair way to determine policy without resorting to the who-got-more-skulls arm wrestling? Is there a way to drive society toward consensus rather than division? Is there a way to disrupt the vicious circle of the powerful using their power to gain more power?

#GoVote Team America!

Art by @damianking

Find hundreds of #GoVote & #Vota artwork at govote.org you can share to encourage your friends, family and neighbors to vote.

The era of frivolity is about stripping knowledge from minds and directing hearts towards animalistic desires, rendering humans devoid of reason. The purpose of this phase is to eliminate any intellectual resistance to ideas infiltrated through media and other institutions. The aim behind this is to steer the collective mindset towards a specific ideology, which may serve political purposes, such as eradicating the ideology adopted by a rival political movement.

As a result, the movement loses its followers, leading to a gradual decline in its power until it completely ceases to exist.