A major issue commonly associated with Direct Democracy is the tendency to turn into an Ochlocracy, which is often referred to as “mob rule” (“Ochlocracy | Definition of Ochlocracy by Merriam-Webster”). In an ochlocracy-a system considered to be literally ‘the tyranny of the majority’-anything would be ‘legal’ or morally correct as long as it is approved on by the mob or masses. Now this is a dramatic hyperbole of direct democracy but it’s eventual degeneration will be an ochlocracy if preventative measures are not put into place.
The Modern Ochlocracy (Mob Rule)
A good modern example of ochlocracy is “cancel culture”, cancel culture while not a political system by nature is the rule of the many in society turning against one or a minority without a significant thought of individuals ethics and morals. Ethics and morals of the group both become an amalgamation of the strongest spokens ethical and morals which guide the majority’s attack on the victim's character whether innocent or guilty, a noticeable lack of humanism, of the crime of which they are accused of. The “cancel culture” phenomena oftentimes is directed against people who are deemed as unsavory individuals; Those who have (allegedly) committed acts against the delicate social fabric that individuals online and in society rely on for a comfortable (social) ‘being’. Whether or not this form of social or internet justice is justified is not pertinent to the situations at hand. This is because the wide proliferation of social media has allowed for unregulated persecution with minimal effort and from the most alienated in society; (or the “Most alienated”). The stereotype associated with cancel culture, being generally left wing, is not a fluke or ‘systemic bias’ against the left, at least in the past four years. In the last four years, progressives have faced incredibly solid opposition against their movement by former president Donald J. Trump and his supporters'. Many incidents of alleged ‘cancel culture’ increased as the conflicts between rival camps flared up when any move was made by the other. In this quote a social psychologist’s analysis of this phenomenon is noted and commented on,
“The social psychologist John Drury shows that the discourse around crowds, collectives, and people in power have historically been problematic and negative, revealing the class biases and political ideologies of those commentators who describe them’...’Drury points out, this language systematically delegitimizes the aims of these collectives as being trivial, if not dangerous: If the crowd is pathologized and criminalized, then its behaviour is not meaningful. There can therefore be no rational dialogue with it. Since the crowd is not part of the democratic process, it is legitimate and even necessary to suppress it with the full force of the state.’” (Luu).
The influence of the majority is not merely unchecked tyranny but the perception of the majority’s mobbing is judged and tried in the court of public appeal by the minority (those who did not participate or are ideologically incompatible). This is where one sees the conservative’s coming out in a reactionary capacity to staunchly criticize the mob-like behavior of the ‘progressive’ left. The perception of the actions of the mob is subjective and generally subject to wider criticisms than praise by society at large. The mob constitutes itself more of a ‘conglomerate of atoms’ than a mob-both sides claim that their side is not-but nonetheless an atomic view of social relations is formed in this mob's formation-this certainly can not be positive. The scientific origins of cancel culture are ones rooted in the social sciences in this article the author refers to a research paper on the findings of psychologist Michele Gelfand on how ‘tightness’ (mass social coercion on a similar ideological basis) effect cancel culture in other societies,”...national and subgroup cultures differ in the degree to which they are tight or loose.
Extremely tight cultures, like those found in Pakistan, Malaysia and Singapore, have very clear and strict rules, norms and taboos for social behavior. When members of their society deviate from the rules, they’re often met with harsh sanctions from other citizens — similar to our online “cancel culture” today.” (Coleman). This example of society's social coercion shows how a direct democracy would function based on how coercive individuals are ideologically in any given society, in relation to cancel culture/mass consciousness. In the remainder of the article follows an explanation of what happens in looser cultures in regards to the phenomenon of ‘cancel culture’,”
Looser cultures on the other hand, like in Brazil, Greece and New Zealand, may also have rules, but citizens see them more as guidelines or suggestions, and allow much more room for social deviance and individual expression.” (Coleman). The online progressive community has become a tightly bound tightly strung community under the Trump administration which kept progressives on constant alert for attacks on ideological goals and the crusade against ideas commonly binding progressive peoples together. In it’s tightness the so-(synthetic)-called left had been under the hand of trump but had always enjoyed the majority (of support) when they had been in office. But trump found himself in office with a majority of media (and support) against him, this was not a normal presidency, no-Donald trump's presidency was no normal presidency. It was (by the media) claimed to be an Administration en contradiction avec « les masses » In this liberals found that they had been cheated from what they felt was an easy win, in reality they lost off of a technicality meant for this occasion. In opposition to tyranny from the neoliberal establishment Donald Trump stood up, walked gracefully up to the mic, and engaged in antagonism so intense and unseen by The Establishment they were-unable to foresee-forced by the people to accept a different ruler than promised. This however does not mean he was not immediately the property and ultimate agent of The Establishment, but it did mean he could openly provide irreconcilably intense criticism to The Establishment.
Such was an unknown phenomena, even the most horrific war criminals are given by The Media (Colin Powell) a hero's burial in death, ultimately equating those Most Heroic Patriots who founded this country with this disgusting Traitor of The People. This article points out in the conclusion that,”..tightness comes from living under prolonged states of threat and attack.”(Coleman). Which progressives have come under increasing amounts of tightness leading to the essential militarist usage of ‘cancel culture’. “When under threat, groups often find that they need to get in sync — coordinate and communicate more efficiently and effectively in order to survive.”(Coleman). This however is a movement of offense not of defense, this is due to the fact that now in Biden's presidency, with supremacy over all branches (something dangerous if not for their purposefully lucrative nothingness). The “(Synthetic)Left '' (The Elite) claim they have a similar presence to the very clearly poached and attacked conservative. The Trump Administration was similarly abused by The Media, ( {alth) and while the retorts may be less than coherent from them, such should be a reason to not strike hatred and shame on those (Conservatives&Trump; AKA:The Masses;The /<(We The)>\ People.) one does not even know.
The ‘cancel culture’ that exists today is a form of modernized oclocarchy in which social media progressives and sometimes even conservatives act as a metaphorical mob against different ideals. This is why even the people must be able to restrict themselves from having unfettered control over their governance. Additionally on the left a very influential figure had this to say on the left,
“...Among the people, some see this question in a somewhat different light. Two kinds of persons hold views different from ours. Those with a Rightist way of thinking make no distinction between the enemy and us and take the enemy for our own people. They regard as friends the very persons whom the broad masses regard as enemies. Those with a "Left" way of thinking magnify contradictions between ourselves and the enemy to such an extent that they take certain contradictions among the people for contradictions with the enemy and regard as counter-revolutionary persons who are actually not counter-revolutionaries. ..." -Mao
They wish to divide us but we should not allow them, those who call themselves social democrats, or more modern abstractions such as Anarcho-Syndicalism, Anarcho-Communism, Libertarian Socialism, Social Anarchism, Mutualists, “”The Left”” is the enemy and should be treated with hostility when required. Those who ally themselves with the left who come from the right are Fascists and “”Third Positionists”” they, are the ones at the present moment conspiring to attack People they dislike. They act like a mob, simply irrationally violent, they are anarchists, terrorists, the most vile betrayal to ideology one can commit. These are those who attack relentlessly at the most sacred of social traditions while claiming vehemently that “femboy Tradcath Girls'' are crucial elements of future society. These are the seeds of the corruption of liberal democracy (with regards to whether it may remain “traditional” or Conservative) and they are almost always present when created as they are one of many contradictions which fuels it’s dialectical reaction and socio-historical circumstances occur- thus engaging objectively in (creating/”accelerating”) history.
1^The mob and masses phrase was chosen over a phrase more similar to “the people”, because as noted by present researchers, an individual representing themselves may be doing themselves a disservice; this disservice presents itself by the process of an improper (or seen as negative) introduction of their demands or beliefs to the governing (part/y/ties) institute.
2^Not actually alienated but liberals LARPing as minorities, victims of horrid abuses, or some other similar sort of immutable injustice which must be sharply punished.
3^Think of a root people, a historically constituted people’s place!
4^All of the establishment media not just left but all which create neoliberalism as it can be seen or given verbal character today. Also Vaush and many similar figures paid him a respectful Hurrah
Comentarios