Personal Note XX

Yahweh in (יהוה‎):
Moses and the Burning Bush

Why I don't like democracy |
Sunday – December 7, 2025

Sir. Winston Churchill used to say: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the other ones". Yes, to the extent that you seek to maximize immediate and personal freedom in relation to materialism, yes democracy is probably the best form of governance. But I am not here to argue against democracy, because I don't believe in or support other forms of government either. Yes, I have made the case for aristocracy, and feudalism, but I never made the case for those forms of government, and that largely has to do with how most modern men interact with the concept of government: I don't make the case for a government, more than I make the case for the sky being blue. No, I made the case for better and righteous social orders, but I've never made the case for the modern conceptualization of the government, because quite frankly I don't believe in modern and material governance structures, and whether there's a technocratic elite or a tinpot dictator in charge I don't really care: both forms of government will, at the end of the day, achieve mostly the same effect. So, the entire idea of a government is largely speaking a fairly modern concept. In the past, particularly under feudalism, it wasn't so much that people lived under a government, because those states did not consist of one unified government: they existed as multiple realms, under which people were protected by their feudal lords, in exchange for a certain amount of work. But the reason why I don't like democracy has more to do with what democracy, with or without government btw, does to people: democracy is fundamentally a very radical idea based on egalitarianism, and really you need to completely upend and restructure any society from the ground up to even approach any form of democracy, and you need to impose on the entire population two sets of ideas: nationhood and individualism. While these ideas may sound contradictory, they are in fact at the core of modern and democratic nation-states: you need to create a government that basically replaces God as the moral arbiter of the universe, which in turn invites the government to grow ever larger and more salient in the mind of the collective unconscious, it's a precursor to totalitarianism; and at the same time you need to reduce the world of each man, of each citizen, to the small and the little life of the individual, unique in their person yet so inscrutable in form. Well, I am against this: I do not find this way of relating to the world natural or good, and do not believe in the egalitarian idea that all men are equal in stature, importance, indeed in opinion. I simply do not believe that most any men should or could perform the role of leader; leadership is something that has to be earned, it's not a right. In fact, most men do not want leadership, because it's hard and because it's not rewarding for most men, yet this truth is purposefully ignored and we're all just supposed to pretend that we're all up for the task, because now that we're all been made aware of the nation and of our role and duty as a citizen of the nation we aren't given a choice, because granting us a choice would imminently collapse all of these fantastical notions of equality and a brotherhood of man that does not exist and never did exist, beyond the modern mass psychosis which really is democracy.

    Verily, in order to actually believe in democracy you need to be under a grand delusion, and yes most people are delusional, but that's because they don't know better: yes the populist horde is large and powerful, but that doesn't make it right. Yes, to be ruled by majoritarianism is really no way of life for a man that seeks to live by eternal truths and wisdom. But my critique of democracy isn't only about contrarianism; it's also about being objective in a material sense. If most people are ignorant and only follow the herd, how are we supposed to know when we're doing something wrong? Well, we don't know and more often than not the world is guided and ruled by principles that aren't necessarily based on reality, but the mass psychosis is so vast that it manages to overcome reality, and that's not a fun place to be. But it's also true that in order for the elites to perpetuate the democracy delusion, they have to create a very materially rich and prosperous society, and that's largely why democracy tends to fall across material lines: poor countries don't tend to be "advanced" democracies for that very good reason.

    In the end, I don't dislike democracy more than dictatorship, but I dislike what democracy does to men more so. If you will you can imagine it like this: if a dictatorship largely has to rely on a capital of violence in order to keep the masses down, a democracy relies much more on the power of delusion and control of the mind to keep the masses down, and yes I do dislike this aspect more without having to endorse autocracy.

Reginald Drax – December 7, 2025.