Democracy judges itself to be the great protector of the individual. It has “checks and balances” to curb abuse and exploitation. Funny! For if we analyze its legitimate child, i.e., the democratic politician, we notice the following: in a democratic regime, there are no checks against stupidity! Let’s see. To what does the democratic politician dedicate himself? does he study? does he prepare for the position he intends to hold? does he qualify, in some way, to perform some function? does he prove, in some way, his capacity before ascending to the post? Negative. The democratic politician is dedicated only to winning votes. To get elected, it is enough for him to buy support or invest in marketing. Any other effort is futile and unintelligent. Now, let’s imagine an anti-democratic measure: to be a candidate, the individual must pass a qualification test. Roars! Screams! Making illiterates ineligible would be an aggression to the sovereignty of the people! And so, history seems to show that the individual is always, always in the position of a victim—in democracy, above all, he is whipped by popular stupidity.
Democracy Judges Itself to Be the Great Protector of the Individual
