Why people in democracy prefer equality over freedom?

[Anonymous No.18198089]

"I think that democratic communities have a natural taste for freedom: left to themselves, they will seek it, cherish it, and view any privation of it with regret. But for equality, their passion is ardent, insatiable, incessant, invincible: they call for equality in freedom; and if they cannot obtain that, they still call for equality in slavery. They will endure poverty, servitude, barbarism – but they will not endure aristocracy. This is true at all times, and especially true in our own. All men and all powers seeking to cope with this irresistible passion, will be overthrown and destroyed by it. In our age, freedom cannot be established without it, and despotism itself cannot reign without its support."

"Democracy In America" Alexis De Tocqueville

Book 2.
Influence Of Democracy On The Feelings Of Americans

Chapter I: Why Democratic Nations Show A More Ardent And Enduring Love Of Equality Than Of Liberty

Why people would rather live under equal tyranny than have aristocracy?

[Anonymous No.18198093]

>>18198089
Not this thread again.

[Anonymous No.18198597]

>>18198089
Not even his most important book

[Anonymous No.18198964]

>>18198089
>People want equality because of democracy
Other way around Frenchie

[Anonymous No.18198970]

>>18198093
>>18198964
Based Tocqueville filtering the non-readers.

[Anonymous No.18198972]

>>18198089
People don't want others to rule over them. How is this difficult to understand?

[Anonymous No.18199107]

>>18198972
This isn't really Tocqueville's point.
When he discusses democracy he means equality as a will to power, the neutralising aspects are balanced by centralisation, so the question remains how this equality is formed where something greater than the nation or species rules over them.

His thinking is not that different from Nietzsche in regards to the formation of a new species, or even genus. Equality is only a measure of this creative power which cannot be mastered by the old laws and political power (obviously his thinking departs from Nietzsche here, although he is describing this in historical terms rather than suggesting it is positive)

[Anonymous No.18199122]

>>18199107
"The same person who is quite willing to leave the government of the entire nation in the hands of an autocrat balks at the idea of not having a voice in the administration of his village - such is the residual weight of the hollowest of political forms."
He describes this in some detail elsewhere, almost as a civil war formation. I will post it if I can find it.

[Anonymous No.18199127]

Related

"GOD does not contemplate the human race in general. At a single glance he takes in every human being separately, and in each he sees the resemblances that make him like all the others and the differences that set him apart.
God therefore has no need of general ideas; that is, he never feels the need to subsume a very large number of analogous objects under a single form in order to think about them in a more convenient way.
This is not the case with man. If the human mind undertook to examine and judge individually all the particular cases that came to its notice, it would soon become lost in a sea of detail and cease to see anything. In this extremity it has recourse to an imperfect but necessary procedure that is as much a proof of its weakness as a compensation for it.
After giving cursory consideration to a certain number of objects and remarking that they resemble one another, it ascribes a single name to all of them, sets them apart, and proceeds on its course.
General ideas attest not to the strength of the human intellect but rather to its insufficiency, for in nature no beings are exactly alike; no facts are identical; no rules are applicable indiscriminately and in the same way to several objects at once."

[Anonymous No.18199136]

>>18198089
I would take anything but freedom.
Freedom means responsibility and then I would have to own up to it with no escape like blaming god or the government I'm weak minded and afraid

[Anonymous No.18199155]

>>18198089
Define freedom. Are we talking about freedom-from, or freedom-to?

[Anonymous No.18199165]

>>18199127
Jünger says something similar to this in regards to the elimination of identity. The loss of striking individual features for the general is a force of biological nihilism, a metamorphosis of the species, or genus, in keeping with a new world order.
The general features are not entirely a weakening, but a physical blindness within the whole species where it must form new dominant characteristics.

Otherwise, the loss of species features are a mark of catastrophe, survival where only the primordial functions must endure.
At the worst moment a mother will divide her child and offer half to the occupying soldiers. Destruction of the species becomes law where justice is impossible.

[Anonymous No.18199518]

This follows a discussion of the heightened search for general ideas in the Ameeicans:

"Such dissimilarity between two highly enlightened peoples astonishes me. When I think, moreover, about what has happened in England over the past half century, I feel justified in saying that the country’s taste for general ideas has increased as its ancient constitution has grown more tenuous.
Hence the more or less advanced state of enlightenment is not in itself enough to explain what leads the human mind to love general ideas or to avoid them.
When conditions are highly unequal, and inequalities are permanent, individuals gradually become so dissimilar that there seem to be as many distinct forms of humanity as there are classes. We never observe more than one of these at a time, and, losing sight of the common thread that ties them all together in the vast bosom of the human race, we always see only certain men and never man as such.
Hence people who live in aristocratic societies never conceive highly general ideas about themselves, and because of this they are habitually mistrustful of such ideas and feel an instinctive distaste for them.
By contrast, a person who lives in a democratic country sees around him only people more or less like himself, so he cannot think of any segment of humanity without enlarging and expanding his thought until it embraces the whole of mankind. Any truth applicable to himself seems applicable in the same way to all his fellow citizens and fellow human beings. Having become accustomed to using general ideas in the field of studies that takes up the better part of his time and interests him most, he carries the habit over into other fields, and in this way the need to discover common rules everywhere, to subsume large numbers of objects under a single form, and to explain a set of facts by adducing a single cause becomes an ardent and often blind passion of the human intellect.
There is no better proof of this than the opinions of Antiquity in regard to slaves.
The most profound geniuses of Greece and Rome, the most comprehensive of ancient minds, never hit upon the very general yet at the same time very simple idea that all men are alike and that each is born with an equal right to liberty. They did their utmost to prove that slavery was inscribed in nature and would always exist. What is more, all available evidence suggests that even those ancients who were born slaves and later freed, several of whom have left us very beautiful texts, envisioned servitude in the same light.

[Anonymous No.18199521]

>>18199518
All the great writers of Antiquity belonged to the slave-owning aristocracy, or, at any rate, saw that aristocracy as society’s undisputed master. They stretched their minds in many directions, but in this one respect they proved limited, and it took the coming of Jesus Christ to make people understand that all members of the human race are by nature similar and equal.
In ages of equality, all men are independent, isolated, and weak. The actions of the multitude are not permanently subject to any man’s will. In such times, humanity invariably seems to chart its own course. In order to explain what is happening in the world, one is therefore reduced to looking for a few great causes, which, by acting in the same way on each of our fellow men, induce all of them to follow the same route voluntarily. This again naturally favors general ideas and fosters a taste for them."

[Anonymous No.18199559]

Pantheism is our great enemy.

"As conditions become more equal and each man in particular becomes more similar to all others, weaker and smaller, one stops looking at citizens and becomes accustomed to considering only the people; one forgets individuals and thinks only of the species.
In such times, the human mind is keen to embrace a host of diverse objects simultaneously. It invariably aspires to associate a multitude of consequences with a single cause.
The mind becomes obsessed with the idea of unity and looks for it everywhere, and when it thinks it has found it, there it is content to dwell. Upon discovering in the world but one creation and one Creator, it finds even that primary division of things troubling and deliberately seeks to enlarge and simplify its thought by subsuming God and the universe in a single whole. If I encounter a philosophical system which holds that everything in the world, material or immaterial, visible or invisible, is merely part of one immense being, which alone remains eternal amid constant change and continuous transformation of all its component parts, I may conclude straightaway that even though such a system destroys human individuality — or, rather, because it does — it will hold a secret charm for men who live in democracy. All their intellectual habits prepare their minds for it and pave the way for them to adopt it. It naturally draws and captivates their imagination. It feeds their intellectual pride and flatters their intellectual sloth.
Among the various systems that philosophy employs to explain the universe, pantheism seems to me one of the most apt to seduce the human mind in democratic centuries. All who are still enamoured of man’s true greatness should join forces to combat it."

[Anonymous No.18199580]

>>18198089
Well for starters, because aristocracy inevitably leads to tyranny, so your choices are really living equal under tyranny or living unequal under tyranny.

[Anonymous No.18199648]

A counterintuitive answer, it is our proximity to god which brings about his death. And our equality is formed of this providential rearrangement.

"It is impossible to imagine anything as insignificant, dull, or encumbered with petty interests — in a word, as antipoetic — as the life of an American. Among the thoughts that guide such a life, however, one is invariably pregnant with poetry, and that one is like the hidden sinew that gives vigor to all the rest.
In aristocratic centuries, each people, like each individual, is inclined to remain fixed in place and separate from all others.

In democratic centuries, people are extremely mobile and impatient in their desires, hence they are constantly changing places, and inhabitants of different countries mingle with, see, listen to, and borrow from one another. So it is not only the members of a single nation who become more alike. Nations themselves grow more similar until they seem, in the eye of the beholder, to merge into one vast democracy, each citizen of which is a people. For the first time in history, the features of the human race become clearly visible.
Everything connected with the existence of the human race as a whole, with its vicissitudes and its future, becomes a very rich vein for poetry.
The poets of aristocratic times created admirable works by taking as their subject certain incidents in the life of a people or a man, but none ever dared to embrace the destinies of all mankind, whereas poets who write in democratic ages may undertake to do just this.
As individuals look beyond their own country and at last begin to perceive humanity as such, God reveals ever more of himself to the human spirit in his full and entire majesty.
If faith in positive religions often wavers in democratic centuries, and if belief in intermediate powers, whatever they be called, fades, men are nevertheless apt to form a far vaster idea of Divinity itself and to see its intervention in human affairs in a new and brighter light.
Seeing the human race as a single whole, they find it easy to conceive that a single design presides over its destinies, and in the actions of each individual they come to recognize signs of the general and fixed plan whereby God conducts the species.

[Anonymous No.18199666]

>>18199648
Democratic poets will always seem petty and cold if they venture to bestow corporeal form on gods, demons, and angels and bring them down from heaven to vie for the earth.
But if they seek to link the great events they narrate to God’s general designs for the universe, and to reveal the sovereign master’s thought without showing his hand, they will be admired and understood, because the imagination of their contemporaries naturally follows this same route.
One may anticipate as well that poets who live in democratic ages will depict passions and ideas rather than persons and actions.
The language, dress, and daily activities of men in democracies are refractory to the idealizing imagination. Such things are not poetic in themselves, and even if they were, they would cease to be so because they are too well known to anyone to whom the poet might speak about them. Thus the poet is forced constantly to delve beneath the surface revealed by the senses to catch a glimpse of the soul itself. Nothing lends itself more to portrayal of the ideal than man seen in just this way, by sounding the depths of his immaterial nature.
I have no need to scour heaven and earth to find a marvelous subject rich in contrasts and abounding in examples of grandeur and pettiness, deep darkness and striking clarity, and capable of inspiring simultaneous pity, admiration, contempt, and terror. I have only to consider myself: man emerges from nothingness, journeys through time, and ultimately vanishes forever into the bosom of the Lord. Only for a moment do we see him roaming the outer reaches of the two abysses that otherwise consume his existence.

[Anonymous No.18199681]

>>18199666
If man knew absolutely nothing about himself, he would not be poetic, for no one can portray a thing he has no idea of. If he saw himself clearly, his imagination would remain idle, having nothing to add to the picture. Man is sufficiently exposed, however, to see something of himself, yet sufficiently veiled that the rest remains shrouded in impenetrable darkness, into which he makes repeated forays in the vain hope of understanding himself fully.
Hence one should not expect the poetry of a democratic people to live on legends, to feed on traditions and ancient memories, to try to repopulate the universe with supernatural beings in which readers and poets themselves no longer believe, or to serve up cold personifications of virtues and vices that can be seen in their own right without such devices. It lacks all these resources, but man remains, and man is enough. Human destinies — man, taken apart from time and country and set before nature and God, with his passions, doubts, unprecedented good fortune and incomprehensible misery — will become the chief, if not the sole, subject of poetry for such peoples, as is already apparent when one considers what has been written by the greatest poets to have emerged since the world turned toward democracy.
The writers who in recent years have so admirably portrayed Childe Harold, René, and Jocelyn did not pretend to be recounting the actions of an individual; their purpose was to illuminate and magnify certain still-obscure aspects of the human heart.
Such are the poems of democracy.
Hence equality does not destroy all the subjects of poetry; it reduces their number but enlarges their scope."

[Anonymous No.18200098]

>>18199559
Based.

[Anonymous No.18200631]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18200635]

>>18200631
You couldn't just let it die?

[Anonymous No.18200654]

>>18199559
>Among the various systems that philosophy employs to explain the universe, pantheism seems to me one of the most apt to seduce the human mind in democratic centuries. All who are still enamoured of man’s true greatness should join forces to combat it."
How could he be this wrong. Tocqueville seems to be the guy that got everything wrong. That is exactly the opposite of everything we see today. We see humans splitting into the belief in multitudes rather than unities. Transgenderism, spectra, multiculturalism (rather than monoculturalism), postmodernism, etc.

Not sure why anyone takes him seriously after massive miscalculations like this.

[Anonymous No.18201161]

>>18200654
>We see humans splitting into the belief in multitudes rather than unities.
LOL

Tocqueville is actually spot on. Look at the language in democracy. People talk about equal freedom, egalitarianism, tolerance, non-discrimination. Why? Because they believe the whole world should be unified into one, hence "tolerance" as a unifying principle. Democratic people don't like complexity and diversity in society. The words they use signify a drive towards unification. This is one reason why people want to abolish borders.

[Anonymous No.18201174]

>>18198089
Because equality is what truly guarantees freedom. If someone have more rights, they are more likely to abuse these and cuck your rights.

[Anonymous No.18201203]

>>18198089
Demanding equality grants you power and status, demanding freedom gives away power and status. There is simply very few games you can play in which a geniune restriction on sovereignty is the expected strategy, this is even more true in a democracy as it is harder to enforce one aesthetic/ethic with state force. That vision needs to have taken over necessary power structures first, one politician/bureaucrat at a time, and may need to be a part of the mileu if it wants to last.
This is just what happens, not dabbing on democrazy as the problem with more autocracy is similar in that by definition you already sacrifice a great amount of freedom, and there is far more ideologies that care little about freedom that are "enforceable" for a society.

[Anonymous No.18201909]

>>18200635
KYS

[Anonymous No.18201916]

>>18200654
How much Tocqueville have you read?

[Anonymous No.18202042]

>>18198089
Freedom is a meme, as is equality

[Anonymous No.18202061]

>>18198089
“It is difficult for me to imagine what 'personal liberty' is enjoyed by an unemployed person, who goes about hungry, and cannot find employment. Real liberty can exist only where exploitation has been abolished, where there is no oppression of some by others, where there is no unemployment and poverty, where a man is not haunted by the fear of being tomorrow deprived of work, of home and of bread. Only in such a society is real, and not paper, personal and every other liberty possible.”

[Anonymous No.18202265]

>>18198089
Democracy is literally about equality, since Athens.

[Anonymous No.18202760]

>>18202265
Tocqueville doesn't consider Athens to be a democracy, he calls it aristocratic republic.

[Anonymous No.18203513]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18203534]

>>18202760
So is America (oligarchy not aristocracy though)

[Anonymous No.18203536]

>>18198089
>equality over freedom

[Anonymous No.18203541]

>>18198089
Freedom is a joke. Aristocrats are not free.
The last free people of Europe were Norwegian Vikings who moved to Iceland to be "free" inbred, constantly feuding farmer, with serfs and slaves
Tocqueville was used to his own way of life, and the myths used to justify it, but no one in any 18th century nation was "free"

To add to this of course, equality is as much a joke as freedom. It is just myth used to make gullible peasants feel good about being slaves

[Anonymous No.18204118]

>>18203541
>Freedom is a joke
It appears as a joke because of the legislation of liberty, and its being combined with equality and economic thinking, but its power has not changed.

[Anonymous No.18204190]

>>18201161
None of that is pantheistic. It's monotheistic. Pantheism is a stepping stone to polytheism.

[Anonymous No.18205349]

"Freedom as a species identifier - this is to be understood as a mark of prestige. It is the distinguishing character of the chieftain, and belongs to the dignity which the few carry for the many, for all. Just as the few carry sexuality for all in mound-building insects, so the few have freedom for the many in the human category. Socrates was not free for himself alone; his freedom functioned for the many, and still functions today.

Man as a species moves within the invisible mass of the iceberg, determined and instinctive; in this context of determination, intelligence, even in its sharpest expressions, can also be counted as an instinct. Dostoevsky, to bring this paradox to expression, chose the "Idiot", a portrait of the higher type of person. Intelligence cannot create freedom, which inhabits deeper and higher strata; it can however build up its arsenal.The

Spiritual freedom distinguishes the human species. It is found there alone. Political being and state-building, by contrast, are not reserved for man alone. Man lived long without states and will perhaps be capable thereof again. The state-building capacity was given to man at a certain point in his development as a formative principle, as happened with other species.

Once connected with life, the formative principles are repeated. They float as microbes, as possibilities in life's undifferentiated stream. This explains the constantly repeated attempts at state-building in the coelenterates, all the way up from the primeval animals. Freedom in the spiritual sense first entered into the stream of life with man. From that point on freedom cannot be lost. In this respect one can concur with Hegel.

The preservation of freedom, on the other hand, is man's task. Since freedom distinguishes the human more distinctly than state-building, it must take precedence over the preservation of the state. Therefore, the state cannot guarantee freedom, only man himself can. This does not exclude the possibility that he might need the state for this goal."

[Anonymous No.18206652]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18208414]

>>18198089
Bump

[Anonymous No.18208661]

>>18198089
Poor fags just using big words to justify theft is all it is

[Anonymous No.18209303]

bump

[Anonymous No.18209624]

>>18198972
That’s exactly the point. Democracy is dishonest. It pretends the people rule themselves while the actual rulers engage in things the average person has not even heard of.

[Anonymous No.18209650]

>>18204118
The US used to be the land of the free because everyone could fuck off into the territories and live off the land
Living in a state, everyone is a chained dog squabbling over slobs

[Anonymous No.18209842]

>>18209650
But the desire for freedom remains. The threat of civil war is part of this. Even the 'chained dogs' are at least responding to the modern law of freedom.

[Anonymous No.18210385]

>>18198089
In order to exercise one's freedom, one must be able to sustain. You can be totally free of taxes, rules, society, etc but if you are struggling everyday to find food or shelter or money/goods/tools for art/etc, then you don't have access to all the things the world offers.
Social equality (in theory) would provide bare minimum for living (ie: not starving, homeless, in tremendous debt, etc).

The logic is "Freedom is meaningless if I do not have access to life's pleasures, therefore I am willing to give up part of my unlimited freedom in order to have access to goods/services/housing/etc because that is a more fulfilling life for me." which is reasonable. If you wanted to be a sculptor or engineer, living a primitivist lifestyle outside of society would be miserable for you because even though you are socially untethered, your pursuits (ie: the whole reason to have freedom) are impossible without the infrastructure of society.

Not my opinion, just explaining how I understand the situation to be

[Anonymous No.18211155]

>>18198089
>But for equality, their passion is ardent, insatiable, incessant, invincible: they call for equality in freedom; and if they cannot obtain that, they still call for equality in slavery.

wouldn´t that be the radicals begging the state for opressed them more and more? i can see a masochistic sjw asking the government to intervene on behalf of "social justice", the useful idiot doesn´t know that he/she is empowering the state, same with the welfare system and other ridiculous mechanisms of the present

[Anonymous No.18211161]

>>18198089
Democracy gives (an illusion of) power to even the lowest of the low. Slowly it becomes the ideology of resentment, as these people are the majority.

[Anonymous No.18211386]

>>18211155
>>18211161
No. It is much deeper than this.
Tocqueville sees it as providential, something stronger than a state of being.

[Anonymous No.18212281]

Bump

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!bGBGaUpA8kS No.18212307]

>>18198089
>Why people in democracy prefer equality over freedom
I hope I’m reiterating this, but we want BOTH in balance
Which can be had in actual practiced democracy, not this sham, this oligarchy.

[Anonymous No.18213259]

>18212307
God damn it.

[Anonymous No.18213878]

Bumper

[Anonymous No.18214935]

B

[Anonymous No.18216100]

I hate Butterfly so goddamn much bros. It doesn't even do any good to filter her: that leaves half the thread hidden when anons respond to her, only to be met with half-remembered anarchist dogma and pictures of lesbians.

I'll post a response to the thread topic latet

[Anonymous No.18216289]

>>18198089
Any anti-democracy books (that aren't Hoppe). Preferably from an anti-liberal view point.

[Anonymous No.18216294]

Lack of intelligence, brain washing etc.

[Anonymous No.18216516]

>>18200654
Pantheism is apt because nature has been subsumed by culture - as is seen in transgenderism

There's no alterity, difference or "other" today

[Anonymous No.18216587]

>>18216289
Heidegger's rectoral adress

>Europe still wants to cling to “democracy” and does not want to learn to see that this would be its historical death. For as Nietzsche saw clearly, democracy is just a derivative of nihilism, that is, the devaluation of the highest values in such a way that they are henceforward just that and only that—“values”—and no longer formgiving powers. “The ascendancy of the rabble,” “the social mish-mash,” “equal men,”“means once again the ascendancy of the old values”. Therefore “God is dead” is not an atheistic dogma, but rather the formulation for the grounding experience of an event of Western history. I took up this phrase in full awareness in my rectoral address

[Anonymous No.18216646]

>>18216587
Thank you anon. I saw elsewhere the name Carl Schmitt; does he talk about the aforementioned subject?
In the mean time, on the topic of Heidegger, I'd recomend you to watch this aglomerate of lectures in this ~10 minute video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONSlRyWezt8
Tell me your thoughts on it, since I haven't studied Heidegger in depth.

[Anonymous No.18218053]

Bumping on-topic thread.

[Anonymous No.18218274]

Test

[Anonymous No.18218303]

>>18216289
The Problem with Democracy by Alain de Benoist

[Anonymous No.18218382]

>>18198089
Equity = equality.

Equality is freedom. Equality is equality only in the sense where neither of us can do anything else to each other in any negative sense, and this would require us both to have sovereignty over ourselves and our property.

[Anonymous No.18218399]

>>18218382
Sorry I meant to type equity =/= equality

[Anonymous No.18218470]

>Why people would rather live under equal tyranny than have aristocracy?
The inconvenient truth that not all people are born equal. This applies moreso than ever now, when, for example, women are told that they are just as smart and strong as men, find out that they aren't, and end up resenting men and blaming them for their personal failures while doing nothing productive with their lives. Even beyond that, everyone is unique, everyone gets a trophy, everyone is useful, even if they contribute nothing- but as adults, they still see a huge disparity in ability and wealth between themselves and the so-called "elite", or even middle-class members of their own family. Speaking of certain biological facts are legitimately social taboos worse than bashing the Church in the middle ages. All of those that grew up and realize they aren't as smart or special as they were told they should be wish for a system that equalizes everyone, and many believe erroneously that it will not involve tyranny or they simply do not care, so as long as "the elite" or "the 1%" are dismantled.

[Anonymous No.18218835]

>>18198089
Because the less talented, able, or smart are about to punish their betters for the crime of being better.

[Anonymous No.18219218]

>>18198089
anymore good quotes?

[Anonymous No.18219556]

>>18209624
Democracy will always devolve into a Orwellian total state, or a soft-Orwellian information state. How anyone can think popular consensus is a good engine for national level political decision making after the disaster that was the 1900s is beyond me.

[Anonymous No.18219623]

>>18219556
>>>18209624
>Democracy will always devolve into a Orwellian total state, or a soft-Orwellian information state.
As opposed to what? A totalitarian state from the get go?

[Anonymous No.18219816]

>>18219556
>the world wars were caused by the democrats
How historically illiterate are you anon?

[Anonymous No.18220604]

Bumpp

[Anonymous No.18222028]

>>18216587
any other?

[Anonymous No.18222050]

>>18219816
He didn't say Democrats and he didn't mention the World Wars. He said Democracy and the influence of the majority on its direction.

Did you get lost?

[Anonymous No.18222063]

it's obviously a meme to say but unironically the answer is because we live in a society .

trying to be free as things get more unequal ultimately means building higher walls and fences which funnily enough locks you in

[Anonymous No.18222224]

NEW TOCQUEVILLE BREAD

>>18221899
>>18221899
>>18221899
>>18221899
>>18221899

[Anonymous No.18222228]

>>18222224
Cringe

[Anonymous No.18222238]

>>18222228

[Anonymous No.18222348]

Enough with the bumps amigo, time to let it die

[Anonymous No.18222378]

>>18222348
Ok

[Anonymous No.18222662]

>>18222348
Very cool.

[Anonymous No.18222703]

>>18222348
>>18222224
Somebody doesn't like the Tocqueville posting.

[Anonymous No.18223407]

>>18216289
If you are already anti-liberal you wouldn't really need a book against democracy, in fact it makes more sense to read democrats to get their political formula as they believe it. Sort of like how you should read ancaps talking about crime and security to see the shortcomings of the assumptions they have.

[Anonymous No.18223419]

>>18218382
So, basically an unstable equilibrium? How do we make sure the balance of power is kept despite all the power leaks provided by institutional evolution or technological innovation, anon?

[Anonymous No.18223453]

>>18219556
1930s *
It was very temporary though, US formalized the new way it operated and brought the executive's immunity somewhat(glowing agencies were more exempt) germany got yeeted and the party tried to move away from stalinism. US now resembles the gilded age more than it resembled ww2 totality.

It was nothing but the religious war you get every now and then. No worries, next one will have nukes though it will be cool af.

[Anonymous No.18223740]

"It would seem that nothing can be more adapted to stimulate and to feed curiosity than the aspect of the United States. Fortunes, opinions, and laws are there in ceaseless variation: it is as if immutable nature herself were mutable, such are the changes worked upon her by the hand of man. Yet in the end the sight of this excited community becomes monotonous, and after having watched the moving pageant for a time the spectator is tired of it. Amongst aristocratic nations every man is pretty nearly stationary in his own sphere; but men are astonishingly unlike each other – their passions, their notions, their habits, and their tastes are essentially different: nothing changes, but everything differs. In democracies, on the contrary, all men are alike and do things pretty nearly alike. It is true that they are subject to great and frequent vicissitudes; but as the same events of good or adverse fortune are continually recurring, the name of the actors only is changed, the piece is always the same. The aspect of American society is animated, because men and things are always changing; but it is monotonous, because all these changes are alike."

No idea why there's another thread for the same topic.

[Anonymous No.18224520]

>>18201174
Equality of violence is required for freedom, nothing more.

[Anonymous No.18225073]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18226582]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18227495]

>>18222348
What do you read?

[Anonymous No.18228782]

Reading him now.

[Anonymous No.18229929]

>>18222703
Americans are seething.

[Anonymous No.18230290]

>>18222703
Redditors don't like serious discussion and cons don't like that a liberal had far better criticisms than their side.

[Anonymous No.18231143]

>>18198089
Directions run their course
Empiricism is a meme
This will also grow tired

[Anonymous No.18232093]

>>18222348
Just for you

[Anonymous No.18232336]

>>18198089
Hmm, I wonder what maked mediocre people prefer values that would ultimately benefit them.

[Anonymous No.18232347]

>>18198597
Based. The Ancien Regime is less speculative.

[Anonymous No.18232926]

Bumping, I'll respond later

[Anonymous No.18233557]

>>18232926
Did Tocqueville have any notion of the dialectic of the revolution?

[Anonymous No.18233570]

>>18230290
What discussion? the tocqueville/junger sperg just dumps quotes

[Anonymous No.18233720]

>>18198972
This. Biden is ruling for me, at worst with me, but not over me.

[Anonymous No.18233737]

>>18233720
lol

[Anonymous No.18233741]

>>18233570
The thread was asking for quotes

[Anonymous No.18233778]

>>18233570
Imagine getting mad because someone posted on topic.

[Anonymous No.18234699]

Very good but I don't think it says what you posted.

[Anonymous No.18236410]

>>18198089
B

[Anonymous No.18238141]

>>18233570
Not my thread. I posted four quotes that answer OP's question, and made several commentaries. This saves what would be countless hours of research for the few people interested.
Guaranteed that if you don't like it you either don't read or follow some retarded ideology. But to be fair, post your recent threads and analysis to see who the sperg is.

[Anonymous No.18238168]

>literally the last post on the catalog with no post in 10 hours
>bumped
absolutely shameless

[Anonymous No.18238236]

>>18238168
>spending your time watching what gets bumped and when
Maybe you should get off the site for a bit.

[Anonymous No.18238324]

>>18238168
All of the threads with high post counts are off topic. Except this one.
Go back.

[Anonymous No.18239013]

>>18238168
Any good democracy quotes?

[Anonymous No.18239041]

>>18238141
You've been samefagging and shadow-bumping your thread for a week now. Get help, rapture.

[Anonymous No.18239235]

>>18198089
Bump

[Anonymous No.18239973]

>>18239041
Look at this dude.

[Anonymous No.18240104]

>>18198089
Democracy is the only system of cultural organisation that is honest about its hypocrisies by their reappropriation into its metaphysical operation of pure presence.

[Anonymous No.18240821]

>>18239041
Tocqueville predicted this.

[Anonymous No.18242115]

>>18239041
Post shelf and threads.

[Anonymous No.18242186]

>>18238141
Based. /lit/ is trash now.

[Anonymous No.18243332]

>>18198089
Very based. Where do I start?