The Problem with Democracies (and Republics)

     My father once said to me: “In a way our system works alright: The Democrats stay in power until they screw up enough; then, the Republicans stay in power until they screw up enough.”

     What he said might be true but for the following conclusion reported to have been reached (and stated) by the 18th century Scottish scholar Alexander Fraser Tytler:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

     Consider that in 2007 the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that the total debts and the present value of the unfunded liabilities of the federal government, excluding future military, ordinary government and Medicare needs, equal $50.5 Trillion, while the total of all U.S. households’ net worth equals $53.3 Trillion. So, under current fiscal policy, the federal government must consume all or virtually all wealth to meet its obligations. Note: Socialism does not work.

     I believe that strong national defense and intelligence services are a must. But, I absolutely believe that the United States needs to reduce its involvement in foreign affairs, and that we need to shut down many of our foreign military bases. However, as I believe in maximizing individual liberty, I think that a proper balance of the need to perform intelligence activities and the need to preserve individual liberties needs must be struck. I don’t think that the Patriot Act or the Protect America Act of 2007, particularly as interpreted by the Bush Administration, provides a proper balance.

     Aside from judge appointments, I believe that the only really significant difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is that the Democrats will tax wealthier and upper middle class citizens more than the Republicans. The Republicans would rather incur debt to make up the revenue shortfall. Neither party has any interest whatsoever in reducing the size of the federal government. Both parties try to buy votes-consider Medicare’s creation by the Democrats, and its expansion by the Republicans.

     While Republicans once stood for smaller government, those days are long gone. However, as is often the case with human nature, people tend to remain loyal to their party no matter how much it changes.

     In order for the United States to survive and prosper, the federal government must shrink. Practically, that means that the Libertarian Party or a party much like it must grow dramatically.