By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Dangers of Democracy
Letter to the Editor
Placeholder Image

Dear Editor: The Founding Fathers of this Republic gave us a Constitution that, if followed, would ensure a stable and lasting society. We the people have failed to abide by the foundational principles set forth therein in electing those who represent us.

The Founders fully understood the dangers of a Democracy, as clearly evidenced in the Federalist papers. That sentiment is expressed in a quotation questionably attributed to Sir Alex Fraser Tytler, a jurist and professor of history at Edinburgh University in a lecture in 1801. Whoever the author, it embodies a truth borne out by history and emphasizes the results of unrestrained greed. It reads, "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship." Read: entitlements!

What began as a representative Republic with three separate and distinct branches of government, with limited constitutional control over each other, has slowly been transformed into a Democracy. The big step in this transition came about under Franklin Roosevelt and was dubbed "the new deal." It was rife with social programs and was popular with the electorate. When the Supreme Court ruled some of his proposals unconstitutional, he proposed adding a new justice to the court for each justice over seventy years old, which would have added six judges. Of course he would nominate all six, a plan referred to at the time as "stacking the court," to do his bidding.

For the last two years there is ample evidence to suggest that the Executive and Legislative branches were united on a mission to bankrupt the country, rendering the people mere slaves to that cause. The people's last defense from such tyranny is the third or Judicial branch whose primary duty is to see that the other two branches abide by the Constitution. Even there is cause for concern. How can nine literate judges, interpreting the Constitution, in cases affecting our freedom, routinely end up with the same five to four decision?

The Constitution gives the people authority to "govern" government at the ballot box, but when the loyalty of voters can be bought with entitlements, taking them away will likely end in chaos and insurrection, or anarchy. Is there reason to think this could be part of a sinister plan for the country? I think there is good reason to be watchful.

Grady Mullins
Rockdale News