Undermining the Sanctity of Democracy

1/3/2021

I seldom delve into politics on this blog, but I would like to make one brief comment concerning a rather alarming and disingenuous line of rhetoric that likens Donald Trump's "baseless" claims of election fraud to an open attack on "the sanctity of democracy." I'll make my point via a clumsy analogy to a real sacred element of human life - the sanctity of marriage.

Imagine a married couple. We'll call the husband Bob; the wife, Sue. Four years into the marriage, Bob begins finding clues that point to Sue's possible infidelity. He asks her about these, but she manages to explain all of it away, albeit unconvincingly.

Clues of a possible affair continue to surface as the days and weeks pass. One day, Bob reluctantly acknowledges that his wife is indeed cheating on him, and he decides to confront Sue about her adultery. He sits Sue down and painstakingly presents her with all the incriminating evidence he has gathered.

Sue's eyes browse over the videos, the mysterious motel bills, the unfamiliar necktie found under the seat of the her car, and all the rest of it. After a moment, her expression ices over. She stands up, dismisses the evidence with a callous wave of her hand, and then stares at her husband with slit-eyed scorn.

"None of that is evidence of anything."

Bob lifts a handwritten love letter from the table. "You're kidding right? What about this?"

"I never thought you would stoop so low," Sue seethes.

"Stoop so low? I didn't investigate you. You left all of this lying around for me to find."

"Where do you find the nerve and audacity to attack and undermine the sanctity of marriage?"

"What do you mean?" Bob asks incredulously. "You're the one who undermined our marriage."

"I'm not talking about our marriage," Sue responds coldly. "I'm talking about the sanctity of marriage, period. Your behavior demonstrates that you are openly hostile to the institution of marriage and all that is sacred within it! You monster! How dare you?"

Note added: Please feel free to make the husband the cheating spouse if you find this more appealing. I have no preference, either way.

9 Comments

bruce charlton

1/4/2021 07:01:45

IMO a further fact is that - unlike the sacrament of marriage - democracy has no 'sanctity', nor anything like it; but is at best a transition era of political organisation, and at worse one of the roots of our current malaise.

While I certainly support DT in his exposure of the massive and organised election cheating; for me this is about the sin of dishonesty and the ppublic revelation of the extent and solidity Establishment conspiracy and mendacity.

i.e. Democracy is bad, but crooked democracy is a lot worse.

I personally (not that it will happen!) would not want to be drawn into 'defending' democracy, which I regard (like all voting, all committees) as intrinsically evil as is, here and now.

Francis Berger

1/4/2021 08:02:35

@ Bruce - "IMO a further fact is that - unlike the sacrament of marriage - democracy has no 'sanctity', nor anything like it; but is at best a transition era of political organisation, and at worse one of the roots of our current malaise."

I fully agree. I alluded to that point subtly (perhaps too subtly) by putting the sanctity of democracy in quotes and referring to the sanctity of marriage as a real sacred element of human life.

There's much talk about the need for transparency as a means to limit corruption within democracy, but the most transparent thing about democracy is its unlimited capacity for corruption. The current levels of corruption transcend even the most generous definitions of corruption and reveal that the institution has indeed become intrinsically evil. Unlike marriage, any defense of democracy this point in time has become indefensible. Little wonder that those who have done the absolute most to undermine this inherently corrupt institution are now at the forefront of defending its "sanctity."

Michelle

1/4/2021 12:11:35

What you may or not know is that here in the U.S. many states do not require identification to vote, and efforts to make that requirement are often blocked. Of course, this makes any outcome dishonest at its core, and any correct outcome just a matter of happenstance. Back in 2016, I said that the System (what I then referred to as the establishment) was caught off guard and will never allow the people to have their say again. All my family celebrated the big win back then and all I could do was mourn the inevitable lies, misery, and clamp down that the system would have in store for us the next time around.
In this time of universal inverted truth, it's so simple to tell what the actual truth of anything is by what is being peddled. It's so simple- and the gray has completely gone away.

1/4/2021 14:03:37

@ Michelle - Good comment. Yes, this brings up the larger point I have been thinking about and which Bruce mentions in his comment above. Americans - I am an American, by the way - have been inculcated to believe that democracy is sacrosanct. Considerations of inherent corruption aside, recent events have shown us - beyond the shadow of a doubt - that the Establishment does not view democracy as sacrosanct - quite the contrary!

On the one hand, they bombarded the current president with accusations of election meddling and foreign collusion after he was elected, thereby assaulting the supposed inviolability of the election process. On the other hand, they now use the hallowed shield of democracy to defend themselves against their very obvious fraud.

The only question that remains now is this - how will people view democracy going forward. Is it something that is merely corrupt, or is it something that is intrinsically evil?

1/4/2021 17:14:09

The only way I've been guided to any temporal truths, particularly this year, is by seeing what truth isn't. I watched thousands of people marching with "vote" signs while wearing masks with "democracy" on them, and thousands of people lining up to vote with American flag masks on.
I don't believe people of any stripe will ever come to view democracy as anything but a representation of pure freedom.
As for me, I think of the 3 inhabitants of an island (2 wolves and a rabbit) voting on what's for dinner.

Kyle

1/7/2021 12:31:26

I think it's safe to speculate that many people (at this point in time) don't even value the 'sanctity' of democracy. Have a conversation with anyone who passionately opposes Trump and they will have no problem ousting him by any means necessary. The past four years have turned relatively decent and lovely people into dishonest mouthpieces for an agenda they are completely ignorant of.

1/7/2021 14:56:03

@ Kyle - Good comment. As you probably know, the political aspect of what is happening does not interest me too much. I'm more interested in the spiritual aspect of all of this. With this in mind, I think it's clear most modern people do not believe in the sanctity of anything at all - and I mean that in both meanings of the word sanctity: sacred and inviolable.

The first is a cinch to understand because most moderns - many self-professed Christians among them - are not on the side of Good. On top of that, most on that side are atheist-materialists who are incapable of thinking of anything as "sacred. The second is also rather obvious - in a world ruled by dishonesty nothing is unalterable.

Things have come to a point. Ignorance has become virtually impossible. The gray area has disappeared. Everyone is making choices and picking a side - yes, this also applies to the relatively decent and lovely people who serve as *unwitting* mouthpieces.

1/9/2021 13:49:06

'Ignorance has become virtually impossible.' - A very revealing point! Perhaps I just cannot comprehend the reasoning of the atheist-materialists. What they think/feel is 'right' can only be summed in an ideology based on arbitrary fairness, which of course can easily be changed or manipulated at any point. Would then, it be more appropriate to say they are nescient? That would mean they have no idea of the implications of their actions, views, or lack of morals/principles, and any notion of what it truly means to be 'good' both in life and to others. I can only imagine that they never truly grasped that at any stage in their life.

1/10/2021 09:52:03

@ Kyle - I tend to look at the year 2020 as the year of 20/20 vision. Everyone was given the opportunity to see things clearly for themselves without the use of any support of aids. Of course, this does not imply that everyone chose to accept what they have seen - and that's the whole point. Choosing to be or remain on the wrong side after things have come to a point can no longer be defended by claims of ignorance.

Take the trans agenda, for example. The current trajectory of this movement supports and promotes gender transitions for children. Social, political, education, and legal apparatuses in the West are all moving or have all moved to make this possible. It is worth noting that in most cases the child's transition does not depend on any parental approval whatsoever. In fact, in many cases the state has already usurped parental authority.

It makes no difference whether the people supporting this agenda are atheists or self-professed Christians. Anyone supporting this has chosen the wrong side. Anyone who feigns ignorance of the utter evil inherent in this most malicious form of child abuse is beyond disingenuous. Think about it. How could any rational, moral, principled adult believe that sex-change operations for children are a good thing? Anyone who supports this sort of thing is clearly on the wrong side.

Atheist-materialists rely on reasoning and material manipulations because they have not accepted the Truth, but as noted in the example above, evil has become too direct and obvious for any claim of ignorance to hold water. And once again, atheist-materialists are not the only ones on the wrong side - many Christian are as well.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Undermining the Sanctity of Democracy

Leave a Reply.

Archives