Democratic Socialist Seeks To Undermine Democracy?

By Chris Rossini

Over and over, history, theory, logic, and current events in Venezuela, Cuba, and North Korea have proven that Socialism cannot (and will not) ever deliver on its promises. The exceptionally horrific 20th century laid hundreds of millions of people into their graves who suffered under the horrible ideas of Socialism.

However, memories fade. That's part of the human experience. People have a tendency to reproduce past mistakes.

A new movement has tried to throw the word "Democratic" in front of Socialism in an attempt to re-brand it from its deadly past (and present). It was a very smart move. Americans, even though they believe their own democracy is rigged, still think that it's the best political system. Government schools drill into innocent minds that democracy = freedom.

Of course, that's a complete lie, but a lie that serves more than one power center in government very well.

For example, Americans have watched their government literally destroy one foreign nation after another under the banner of "spreading democracy." Remaking complex societies with a style of government that Americans don't even trust themselves was supposedly a great idea. It's still going on today, despite the horrendous results.

Not only has democracy failed at home, but in foreign military adventures as well.

How ironic that Bernie Sanders, the champion of so-called "Democratic Socialism," is now seeking to undermine democracy in his quest for power.

RedState tells us that Sanders is:

losing in votes cast (by several million), in pledged delegates (again, by a significant chunk), and he has no hope of reversing either of these facts, even with a convincing win next Tuesday. 

So "the people have spoken" to use their own vernacular.

That should be it, right?

Wrong.

You see, there's one stipulation for those in power, as well as those who seek power.....Democracy is great if they like the results.

The U.S. government wants foreign nations to be democratic, but those foreign nations must choose rulers that the U.S. approves of. If they don't, in come the U.S.-backed "freedom fighters" and often the U.S. military itself.

Well, Sanders doesn't like that the overwhelming majority of people have chosen Clinton. So he's angling to use "super-delegates" to overrule "the people".

What he [Sanders] has now resorted to is asking the party bosses to save the Democratic party from its own voters, who have overwhelmingly chosen Hillary.

Those of us who support liberty just stare in wonderment at this cycle of folly.

It's totally unacceptable, from a standpoint of liberty, to put blind faith in majorities.

After all, majorities can latch onto some quack ideas like FREE healthcare, FREE college, and FREE whatever is fashionable at the moment. They can convince themselves that they should have "access" and "rights" that don't exist.

There's nothing special about majorities.

Here's what is very special ---> individual liberty and private property rights.