A Vulnerable System Parliamentary democracy is vulnerable to the extremely dangerous possibility that someone with very little voter support can rise to the top layer of government. All one apparently has to do is to be enough of a populist to get elected by ghetto dwellers. Economist and philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe dissects democracy in his book Democracy, the God that Failed, which shines a light on the system’s grave deficiencies with respect to guarding liberty. As Hoppe puts it: “Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.” At first glance this may strike many people as an exaggeration, but considering the trends that have emerged over the past several decades, it
Jayant Bhandari considers the following as important: On Economy, On Politics
This could be interesting, too:
MN Gordon writes The Zealous Pursuit of State-Sponsored Collapse
Antonius Aquinas writes Heaven Forbid Peace Should Break Out Between the US and North Korea!
Keith Weiner writes The Party of Spend More vs. the Party of Tax Less
Jayant Bhandari writes Japan: It isn’t What the Media Tell You
A Vulnerable System
Parliamentary democracy is vulnerable to the extremely dangerous possibility that someone with very little voter support can rise to the top layer of government. All one apparently has to do is to be enough of a populist to get elected by ghetto dwellers.
Economist and philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe dissects democracy in his book Democracy, the God that Failed, which shines a light on the system’s grave deficiencies with respect to guarding liberty. As Hoppe puts it: “Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else.” At first glance this may strike many people as an exaggeration, but considering the trends that have emerged over the past several decades, it seems difficult to refute this assertion. Particularly since the beginning of the so-called “war on terrorism”, individual liberty has suffered numerous setbacks in Western democracies, while the power of the State has grown to almost unheard of proportions. In a democracy everybody is in theory free to join the psychopathic competition for power (in contrast to the largely rigid power structures prevailing in feudal societies), but all things considered, that is a highly questionable advantage. In fact, in many ways it isn’t an advantage at all. [PT]
Thereafter, political correctness and a belief in multiculturalism in the larger society are helpful. One doesn’t have to be very good in political strategizing, or have strong organizational abilities, or even be intelligent. By jumping through a few hoops, anyone can end up as prime minister in a parliamentary democracy, a major risk currently staring Canada in the face.
Harjit Singh Sajjan is currently Canada’s minister of defense. He was elected in Vancouver South, which is one of the districts with the largest immigrant populations: about 75% of its inhabitants are either first or second generation immigrants. Sajjan received 21,773 votes in the 2015 election. He is new to politics, and it recently turned out he lied about his contribution as a military officer in Afghanistan.
Harjit Singh Sajjan, the defense minister of Canada. How can you represent a country when you are elected by a ghetto? Should society-at-large not have a direct say in who ends up in the top layers of government? In a homogeneous, non-ghettoized society in which most people have similar values, a small community can be seen as a microcosm of the larger society. However, this is not the case in the increasingly multicultural and diverse societies of the West, in which people often have extremely disparate values. Should parliamentary democracies in these cases not move toward a presidential system?
Photo via intoday.in
The Indian community in Vancouver South and the nearby town of Surrey are among the most crime prone in Canada, ridden with gang violence, drug-related crimes, etc. Grooming starts very early on already, with kids nudged into joining criminal gangs in schools.
Sikhs in Surrey and Vancouver South are a collective force. The foremost (and mostly the only real) affiliation they have is with their religion. Animosity against Hindus is bred into Sikhs from a very young age here. Honor killings and domestic violence are not unknown, but such crimes often go unsolved for lack of witnesses.
Contrary to conventional belief, among immigrants from South Asia, the Middle East and Africa living in the West, the incidence of crime actually tends to worsen in the second generation. The relaxed atmosphere of the West combined with people from communities that have historically operated in tyrannies makes for an explosive cocktail.
In the West, where certain criminal behaviors (FGM, forced marriages, selective abortions, for example) are not systemic, the law simply has no way to deal with such crimes when they do become systemic in immigrant communities. Sajjan was elected to Parliament in this ecology. For a practicing Sikh, it is almost impossible to go against the wishes of his community.
About 17.6 million votes were cast in the last federal election in Canada. With his 21,773 votes, Sajjan received a mere 0.12% of all votes cast in Canada, and those were from a ghetto. Thereafter, the wish of Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau that 50% of his government’s ministers be women, and that his cabinet be racially and culturally diverse, helped elevate Sajjan to the job of defense minister.
Justin Trudeau gave a 50% quota to women in his cabinet. Some of these women may well be competent, but should I trust them knowing that they might not have been chosen based on merit? Canadians voted for only 88 women in a parliament of 338 members. Assuming other things being equal, statistically only 26% of the cabinet should have been women, if the nominations were solely based on merit.
Odd New Party Leader
This situation is about to get much worse. The NDP is one of Canada’s major political parties. One of the key candidates for its leadership is Jagmeet Singh. He is a Sikh and wears a very old-fashioned turban and leaves his beard open – a custom that has gone out of fashion in India by now, except perhaps in rural areas or in very conservative Sikh communities. From Singh’s perspective, wearing such a turban likely caters to the conservative Sikh vote-bank. Sikhs in Canada are indoctrinated to hate Hindus, despite the fact that such animosity between Hindus and Sikhs no longer really exists in India.
Jagmeet Singh was in fact elected leader of the NDP shortly after this article was written.
Photo credit: BGM Riding Association
Should one trust Singh’s overt displays of religiosity? One has to be a hypocrite to believe that one’s religious values can be kept separate from one’s political values. “Separation of state and church” is an oxymoron. It seems to be working in the West, because Christianity as practiced today no longer believes in forcing its values on others. Moreover, many Christian values do indeed influence western politics. The warmth with which migrants were received in Sweden and Germany is not just based on naivete, but on Christian compassion.
Singh is not even a Canadian member of parliament. He is a member of the legislative assembly of Ontario. He got 23,519 votes in the last election. The two main candidates opposing him were also of Indian origin. 41.9% of people living in his constituency are of Indian origin. This ghetto is also home to other migrants from South Asia.
Singh finds himself challenged by a heckler accusing him of supporting sharia.
A few days ago at a campaign event a woman, Jennifer Bush, heckled Singh, expressing her worry about his support for M103, a motion that Iqra Khalid, a member of parliament of Pakistani origin, brought to the Canadian legislature. Jennifer may have behaved inappropriately, although I wonder how else one can oppose sharia law in politically correct Canada, where diversity and multiculturalism are celebrated as a religion, despite the fact that this religion does not work.
I certainly see no sign of racism in what she said. But ironically, Canadians desperate to look non-racist and virtue-signal, rapidly jumped into the fray and called her a bigot. As it is, support for Singh skyrocketed, as if Singh had any option during the campaign rally to do anything except shout out his sound-bites about “love and courage.”
What one sees when looking at the audience in the video is that virtually everyone except for the campaign manager was from South Asia – more specifically, most were Sikhs. If colored people disproportionately support a colored politician, is that not racism? But in Canada’s politically correct environment, someone promoting a non-Christian religion who displays his religiosity publicly (using a massive turban in this case), is considered open-minded.
Instead it is Jennifer Bush, who merely opposes the imposition of sharia on Canadians, who is seen as racist. In my ideal world, she should have questioned Singh’s overt display of religion with his turban as well.
In general, people from Pakistan and India tend to very much dislike each other. But because they end up living in and around the same ghettos, it is very important for a politician of Pakistani origin to be populist in favor of Indians, and vice versa. Singh supports M103 of course (despite the fact that Sikhism is in many ways opposed to Islam) and in return gets votes from people of Pakistani origin.
This explains why Sikh, Hindu and Muslim politicians from India and Pakistan — despite their utter dislike and hatred for each other — happily jump into bed with each other. Ironically, this is because their collective tribal values are in opposition to western values.
Everything above is about the tribalism, racism, and devout religiosity of immigrant communities living in ghettos, which constitute precisely the things that made the places they left behind poor, wretched and tyrannical. They have brought the same virus to Canada.
Even if these immigrants are only a very small part of Canadian society, due to the way parliamentary democracy works, such ghettos can have an extremely outsized effect on Canadian politics. If Singh is elected the leader of the NDP and the NDP wins the next election, he could very well become the next prime minister of Canada.
Addendum 1 – Singh wins Leadership Contest
Jagmeet Singh has indeed become the leader of the NDP shortly after this article was written [ed. note: thus the way is now open for Canada to eventually end up with a conservative Sikh as prime minister; that would be a rather peculiar development, to say the least].
Addendum 2 – Don’t Talk About Rape in the UK
A similar situation may be developing in the UK. An elected MP of Pakistani origin, Naz Shah, who was voted in by the inhabitants of a ghetto in the UK, asked white teenage girls who had been raped to remain quiet, so as to prevent the matter from reflecting badly on Pakistani and other Asian communities. The UK Labor Party supported her, and not many politicians had the courage to call her bluff.
Addendum 3 – Warped Outcomes in India
India, the world’s biggest parliamentary democracy, has proven itself extremely prone to the warped outcomes discussed in this article. Former prime minister H. D. Deve Gowda was virtually unknown outside his home-state immediately before he was catapulted to the top post as a “compromise candidate”.
Another case was Rajiv Gandhi, who made his way from pilot to prime minister in a span of just four years. Yet another very curious case is that of Dr. Manmohan Singh, who never even won a popular election, but was prime minister on two occasions already. And the new President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, was a complete nobody before getting his post.
Edited by PT
Image captions by PT where indicated
Jayant Bhandari grew up in India. He advises institutional investors on investing in the junior mining industry. He writes on political, economic and cultural issues for several publications. He is a contributing editor of the Liberty magazine. He runs a yearly seminar in Vancouver titled Capitalism & Morality.