One of the worst parts of American democracy is that it tempts people to say “we bring it on ourselves.” We don’t actually live in a democracy even in the most basic sense. We have occasional referenda from time to time which, if they support the cause of the liberal powers that be, will be accepted, though if they run against those powers, they are ignored or quashed by the courts. Californians found this out when they voted to end affirmative action and to deny sodomites the play-acting of “marriage.” This isn’t even mentioning the usurpations of the Supreme Court and the administrative state. Americans get as much democracy as their rulers give them, which is usually just enough to co-indict them in their crimes.

“Democracy” is a nice thing when it deals with things the people can easily know and understand. But the more ostensible authority the people’s votes are given, the more it is clear they are just pawns of the elite. In my town, we had two referenda on the ballot about public projects involving a slight tax increase. Both passed; I opposed one of them. I’m disappointed, but I understand and respect the results. 

Compare that to referenda in other states. In Montana, it was up to voters to decide whether infants born-alive—that is, babies born at any time in the gestational process—are entitled to legal personhood and medical care. The voters of Montana seem to have decided in the negative. Montana, I’m told, is a “conservative” state. There are no “my body my rights” or “when does life really begin?” arguments to be made about a child who has already left his mother’s womb. Justice Kennedy’s idiotic expatiating in Casey about the mystery of life is still the implicit law of the land, and 50.1 percent of voters can decide whether a human being is a person or not. 

This isn’t only evil, it’s asinine. There were no Jeffersonians or sans-culottes so deluded as to think the question of life was decidable by ballot. The average voter isn’t fit to understand the question being asked, let alone come up with an answer. The thing we’re describing is no longer “democracy,” it’s a humiliation ritual, just one facet of the left’s war on objective reality. Campaigning for or against the new park in my town is easy. If I want to whip up support for it I go door-to-door and explain all the benefits it can bring to the town. But how do you go door-to-door explaining what human life is? The process of democratic politicking is transformed into the task of the peripatetics. It’s idiotic. 

And it’s all futile. You shouldn’t trust election results, not just because of ballot-stuffing, but because the kind of democracy practiced in the present day has no meaning except as an expression of how the masses can be controlled by our oligarchs. The “people” who vote are not citizens in any meaningful sense. Their relationship to the composition of the government is not like anything that has existed before. They are more dependent on the government than any group of people has ever been, not only on material or psychic but on spiritual grounds. They are functionaries of the liberal superstructure. It isn’t just that Democrats have a patronage system, but that the liberal mindset and worldview constitutes a more-real reality for the liberal than anything else he has in his meaningless life. 

A form of government is meant to represent the actual makeup of the state. The reason England had three houses of Parliament was to represent three classes whose interests could never totally align, the commons, the aristocrats, and the monarchy. Government itself was synonymous with finding the right relation between these classes. The same was true with the French Estates before the Revolution. The same was noticed by men like John Calhoun, who was always a democrat, but sought out voting systems that represented and protected geographic and class interests within the state. 

Government took on a new meaning after the French Revolution. “Democracy” became the process of forming and shaping the movement of the masses—that is, the capacious Third Estate in France and the industrial dregs who benefited from the Reform Acts in England and Jacksonian democracy here. It was no longer necessary for government to reflect the actual makeup of the state. Instead, government became synonymous with the movement of the masses—which in turn meant government was synonymous with whichever force could effectively wield these masses. So we get the modern party system, loosely united to the class structure of the state, but ultimately run by ideologues. Elections in such a system did not so much reflect the “will” of the voters so much as which ideologues were best able to sway the masses, and as such worthy of controlling the government.

Elections as we’ve come to think of them were not about the mere opinions of the masses, they were about how much human matter the party bosses could wield in their favor. This is why elections took place on one specific day: It was a show of force, like a mostly-peaceful army of human materiel. It showed that one ideologue’s message was stronger than the other’s, at least in terms of riling up supporters, and therefore he gained the right to rule. 

Now that purely physical elections are a thing of the past—done away with in 2020—we are able to see how unreal everything is in what’s called “real life” and how this plays out in government. The Twentieth Century party system was ideological, but still accounted for real differences along class, regional, and racial lines. The Southerner had good reason to vote Democrat, as did the union member. But modern elections are about mere opinions. There is no real difference between an opinion poll and a determinative election when you can respond to either without leaving your sofa. 

The goal of the modern party bosses isn’t to attach one’s platform to a voter’s real interests, but to change the mental environment of the voter to fit the bosses’ goals. They can do this because most real differences between citizens have disappeared: Class, region, and race barely factor at all in our modern technocratic environment. Walmart-Americans are the same all over. They have transcended any traditional notion of class. All their consumption is provided to them in the shoddiest form. Their own employment is probably not productive: They work service jobs, or as mid-management, or as part of some faceless bureaucracy. Real considerations among these people become homogeneous as the products they consume.

So what is left when everything real is removed from politics? It’s only the mental state of voters. And this can be manipulated very easily. Control what’s on one’s smartphone and you’ve captured his mind and captured his vote. The average man is like an unimproved field waiting to be enclosed by the propagandist. 

The amount of power given to the man who controls the narrative is astounding. You can literally burn down Minneapolis and the people closest to the fumes will vote for the men who enabled it. There’s no point in discussing this in terms of regular “politics.” If any such thing as political sanity exists, these people are insane. They simply don’t care about real things like crime or inflation any more than a transsexual cares about the integrity of his genitals. These are sick and demented people, a population that doesn’t believe in the reality of the real. But they don’t have to. Their jobs are fake, their relationships are pixelated, their religions are mere sentiment. They are unbound to the “narrative” that reality has imposed on man since the creation of the world, and live instead in the narrative they get from their screens. 

There are still Americans who are real: Who have real jobs, who have families, who love their racial and regional heritage and understand their creed as a transformative way of life. It isn’t enough to say that these are the last of the “real Americans.” They’re the last real people there are. This is why Trump could hold massive rallies and still be accused of losing the popular vote. Real people still vote for Republicans because, no matter the quality of the candidates, they’re the only party that still engages with the necessities of real life—like keeping drag queenss away from your children, to name just one consideration of many. 

Many of the Democrats who watched over their burning cities in 2020 didn’t bother campaigning this last cycle, and still won big. It doesn’t actually matter much whether their votes are mass-produced by Shaniqwa or actually filled out by a legion of MSNBC viewers. Neither are “real” in a meaningful sense. The bare relations they do have to the social order are less important to them than the notional concerns beamed into their brains. 

And that’s not to say it’s only Democrats living in a fantasy world. Trump was an effective representative for very real issues like immigration because he was a self-created meme, and he has always been aware of this fact. Other Republican memes are not so effective. The Boomer who lives off his Social Security in his suburban McMansion, and spouts off about how America can be saved through flag-waving and inner-city gun-safety is living in a dream of his own. Conservative memes are moribund against the liberal apparatus that controls all mainstream media, but a full return to “real” considerations would violate the Civil Rights Act, along with the tranquility of the flag-waving meme. 

What should Republicans have done to beat the retarded ogre in Pennsylvania? How do we overcome the senile child-molester President who showered with his own daughter? What kind of questions are these? It’s a kind of punditry that plays into the meme version of politics, of the narrative over reality. In the end, even commentators who know better, who are tapped into the real with regards to things like Drag Time Story Hour, fall back to the meme politics loop. Who is better for 2024, Trump or DeSantis? What kind of stupid question is that? Both men would lose, because it’s impossible for either man to win. So why engage in this stupid charade? Because the narrative provides meaning, even for those who are otherwise concerned with the real. Any real political consideration—that is, anything that does not fit within the paradigm of our propagandists’ meme-complex—is “fascism” or “conspiracy theory.” No, because you’re not allowed to talk about anything real, we’re forced to pretend something called “Beto O’Rourke” exists. 

Don’t blame yourself or “democracy” on the hopeless situation. Don’t tell the voters of New York “you voted for this!” as if the assaults to be leveled against them are somehow just because a majority of the herd-animals turned out for Hochul. Don’t give in to idiocy about the pleasantness of “voting with your feet”—as if abandoning your homeland can be honorable, or anything besides a horrible calamity. This mindset is only worthy of a slave, the one who acknowledges he legitimacy of herd-animalization. And anyway, we don’t have a democracy. We don’t have any system of government outside of elite-managed mass insanity. The only real political change that could have any effect would be to destroy all electronic technology and cast the mentally deformed nation out of the memeplex. That probably isn’t feasible. The next best thing is to disenfranchise the enemy. Living in the conservative meme-world may be expedient towards this task, but it is no long-term solution. Any long-term solution has to be focused on restoring government to the real people, the actual citizens, the men with productive jobs, the men who have children and want to rear them up rather than sacrifice them to Moloch. 

Aspire to live in the real world. Don’t pretend that you share a nation or even a notion of reality with your enemies. Ultimately the only political solution is to subject the enemies of reality to reality.