The Origins of Democracy

Many believe Democracy to be one of the greatest forms of government ever created. Psychological study supports Democracy as the most efficient and healthiest style of government in existence, encouraging social interaction, granting purpose to each citizen, and building faith in social institutions encouraging the flowering of community. Every citizen has a vested interest in their government, something to gain and much to lose should it fall, thus each contributes to their utmost to support the state because without them it would surely collapse. We come to identify ourselves with the state and thus protect it. It is an amazing form of governance, creating altruism, innovation, and inexhaustible possibility. But this grand political design did not spring from ideal thoughts, nor did it arise out of the vague belief in the equality of men. Democracy was birthed from fear, not hope. Doubt, not faith, was the ironic seed that birthed Democracy.

Democracy is in and of itself a check on power. It divides authority serving to keep any one person or group from unlimited reign. Each of us is given a piece, so each of us is a member at the table of power. This serves to draw the whole community to government, hundreds, thousands, millions of minds working to solve problems. When the power is wielded by one or a few, the threat to the whole of society increases. The centralizing of power serves to alienate individuals from the state. If one has no say, then one has no part. If one has no part, then why sacrifice? The state and the community separate, eventually destined to become enemies. The process is inevitable. From democracy to republic to tyranny to anarchy. Sometimes society rises from the ashes. Sometimes it does not.

The catalyst of centralized power differs. Sometimes it is a military threat from without forcing a state to streamline government for more immediate responses and defense. Other times it is a gradual process, good intentions such as socialism or communism which gradually take on more and more responsibility. Many times, it is that one or few who suffer from an insatiable drive to seize the reigns of power. It is this figure(s) who serves as the harbinger of tyranny’s reign.

Those of unlimited power find themselves quickly corrupted by it. This is because power can shape reality but also distort it. The tyrant must surround themselves with an inner circle who will carry out their wishes. This inner circle gradually becomes a rampart against the real as they, not the leader(s) exercise authority. They are the tyrant’s tools. This system insulates the leader(s) from society. They lose touch with the real, surrounded by those who rely on the leader(s) for power; leeches parasitically clasped to the breast of government. These sycophants serve as both a crutch and a handicap. Knowing their importance as the gatekeepers to power, this court of bootlickers can distort the truth to the tyrant in order to achieve their own gains or to escape punishment for their ills. They tell the leader(s) what they want to hear. Act as the leader(s) orders. They reinforce the tyrant’s belief in himself until he comes to the view of infallibility. There is no right or wrong. There is only the leader(s) will. This leads to an erosion of moral thought and eventually higher reasoning. Value for critical thinking is lost. Long term planning trails off. The importance of the state falls away. All that matters is the immediate wants of the leader(s). Power exists to support them and them alone. Power begins to be abused further. It becomes baser, more primitive. Society is no longer geared toward community but towards the leader(s) will. Basic service are completely forgotten leading to a decline of the state. As society crumbles, the leader(s) cannibalizes it. He becomes an all consuming monster. This is largely due to an evolution of the pact between the leader(s) and his sycophantic inner circle.

These sycophants become a threat. As the leader(s) powers wane, he comes to rely on his inner circle and their supporters to carry out his will more and more. These sycophants begin to accumulate power from the source until they became the leader(s) sole source of power forcing the leader(s) to make concessions of a damnable sort. Without these sycophants, the leader is vulnerable and defenseless. So he releases the leashes and lets his hounds loose to do as they will as long as they remain loyal.

One has only to look at Mugabe of Zimbabwe for a modern example. He came to power at the behest of the black majority of Zimbabwe in a revolution that saw the toppling of an oppressive white minority government. Great power was vested in him to change the nation for the better. Mugabe surrounded himself with allies as he sought to improve the plight of blacks in his country, home to numerous educated citizens and the breadbasket for southern Africa. He sought to raise the standard of living, spread education, and integrate his nation following the racist practices before his ascension. But greed tainted his rule. Mugabe began to act on his own behalf, enriching himself at the expense of the whites in his country. When the public became wary of his actions, Mugabe used his security forces, rather than the will of the people, to solidify his grip on power by destroying the political opposition, tightening his grip on all parts of the economy, and enforcing order as he saw fit. He sowed xenophobic fear throughout the state of Western attempts to re-impose colonial rule upon them. He galvanized the majority against the minority (blacks against whites). He did all this to divert the citizens’ eyes from his snatch at power. No one balked until the famine came coupled with unemployment and widespread corruption. Then the violence began to affect the majority as it had the minority. The state had come to threaten the community. The split was unmendable. As Zimbabwe increasingly turned against him, Mugabe knew only his security forces could keep him in power. They knew this too. They have made demands of their own, confiscating farms, terrorizing the populace, and worse with impunity because of the power they now held. Mugabe, more and more, has become a figurehead. Even now, Mugabe is largely in power against his will. Security forces are pushing to keep him where he is for fear of the power they will lose. Anyone else in office would surely curb their actions. This is the fate of all leaders: to be devoured by the power they once held.

Tyrants have existed for millennia. As to whether Locke was correct and government arose from a social contract or Hobbes had it right when he stated the strongest forces forged states is irrelevant to this argument. Tyrants arose from the mists of time and forged kingdoms and empires across the face of the world. With absolute power, only their will could check them. The human mind does not work well without boundaries. Every soul, given free reign, is destined to become lost in the limitless expanse of possibilities. Unlimited power is sure madness for the wielder. Every tyrant has proven so. Men such as Ivan III, Stalin, Caligula, and even Alexander have shown the decline humanity encounters once one passes through the portal into limitless authority. There is no structure, only void. Laws do not exist. Punishments do not exist. One keeps going forward into the darkness because there is nothing to hold them back. That is what absolute power is.

Tyrants become so far removed from their subjects that they fail to see them as people anymore. Humanity becomes a faceless mass used to build a tyrant’s feverish dreams into a reality. Bones and blood become resources. Given enough time, every tyrant comes to see them self as a god. Reality is no more. All that is can only be at the will of the leader(s) and woe be unto them who challenge this will.

Democracy arose from the lessons learned of tyrants. The Greeks, the Romans, and many others forged their democratic governments not out of love for, and respect of, the people but to prevent the rise of another evil force. Power was distributed to halt the resurrection of an Age of Tyrants; to keep the Beast in the Pit.

Yet here we are in modern America watching the state gradually centralize authority into fewer and fewer hands. Our leaders are becoming insulated and detached. We have become numbers via polls, Social Security, and census data. We rebel the only way we know how, embracing our individuality in a stranglehold to the point of choking the life out of society. We are embarking on an insane path of centralization via fragmentation. Yet no one notices. So many have withdrawn from our political system because they have lost hope. So few have a stake in what is thus no one cares what is to come. The void is starting to yawn wider and wider. The question is who will step through it.