Faithless Electors and Democracy(The God that Failed)
Right now, a conspiracy exists within the CIA, the media, and members of the electoral college to overturn the election of Donald Trump. Members of Colorado's electoral delegation are suing the state for the right to become faithless and cast their votes for any candidate other than the one the people asked them to vote for (which was Hillary Clinton in the State of Colorado). Just today while sitting at lunch with co-workers, liberals from Boulder, they joked "we may need guns to vote in the next election." I retorted, "the Swiss used to require you to carry your militia rifle in order to vote."
I don't want to out myself as a libertarian, or as a Trump voter, but hopefully I gave them an idea of what voting in a republic really means:
“When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you’re using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.”
Unfortunately, for many sheltered politico's who root for team red or blue, they don't quite understand this simple truth. It seems like a game in the moment, sometimes the words sting like a cut or bruise you, like those you may receive in any contact sport, but in the end you get your trophy: power. Forgotten is the blood and lives that were given. So, even like the pretense that the common folk once often understood, that power was once won with spilling blood, the right to vote is the right to elect agents to initiate violent, even fatal, force against others.
Originally, only the right to initiate violence and extract tribute at the blade of a sword was held by the aristocracy and kings of ancient times, but this was actually predated by the raiding and pillaging habits of nomadic and pastoral peoples. During the agricultural revolution, there were those humans who farmed the Earth for survival and those who farmed the farmers for their own survival. Eventually, the random violence of mobile bands of warriors gave way to a more productive and less outright violent system of tribute such as the first tax on domesticated cattle. The original context of the tribute system was forgotten or propagandized to the point that the warrior class simply offered protection in return for taxes instead of an outright extortion of tribute for safety.
Some cultures, including the Greeks and some Germanic tribes, developed a system to resist the invading warriors of other tribes. The warriors of the agricultural community would form a militia to resist the raiders. They would band together and elect leaders for their warband. Those who could not personally bear arms were expected to donate food, clothing, money, or arms to assist in the effort. Yet, again though the system of militia service became so formalized and the election of its leaders, the expectation of tribute became a similar form of 'taxes for protection'. In the case of United States, there is an informal, parasitic, aristocracy which uses the might of the federal government's police and regulatory powers to extract taxes from the commoners and grant privileges to its members; meanwhile, using the military force to raid and loot other nations.
Anybody who threatens this system of taxation, regulation, and war has to be stopped at all costs in the eyes of this parasitic establishment. Trump at least publicly supports lower taxes, fewer regulations, and less war. I remain skeptical but optimistic. Obviously I would prefer no taxes, no regulation, and no war.
Unfortunately, 12+ years of government-run "education" makes for relatively obedient tax cattle. Not only are there those who will not tug at the chains of their enslavement, but who will also bite those who dare point out their bondage. The faithless electors are just one more thrash of the establishment to resist this loosening of the chains.
This ongoing coup to thwart Donald Trump's acquisition of power will be interesting to watch. Since the Electoral College is such a blatant revolt to the left's vision of democracy, some Democrats propose eliminating it entirely. A republic's purpose is to defend the life, liberty, and property of its citizens, and we don't want any conflicts of interest such as Trump's alleged ties to Russia. Therefore, I would like to propose a few reforms to our voting system as well, especially if we should wish to have a truly free and fair election:
- Property Ownership - one must own property in order to vote. If you do not own property then you have no vested interest in its proper defense.
- No government assistance - one cannot expect a dog to disobey its master just as those who benefit from welfare and entitlements cannot be expected to impartially take part in its dissolution.
- Must Bear Arms - those who expect to ask others to die in war should be expected to go to war themselves. Voters arriving at the polls with weapons proving their willingness to defend the republic is a public display and reminder of the force that government exerts.
Even given such requirements, governments are prone to start a system of taxation and invasion as they did with the classical republics. So, I would still say they are a troublesome idea; but at least with these three simple proposals, it is a start.