If you find this article informative and worthwhile, please support my work by donating if you can.

logo    The New Tyranny


Tyranny, defined as the power of absolute rulers, monarchs and dictators, is well known. Democracy, although it sometimes fails, is said to be the antidote to this type of tyranny. But people will, in times of stress, elect persons who then subvert the democratic system and become absolute rulers.

Not as well known is the tyranny caused by majority approved restrictions on minorities. This type of tyranny was fully exposed by John Stuart Mill in his 1869 pamphlet On Liberty and is quite prevalent throughout the world. Perhaps this pamphlet should be required reading in all democracies. Ethnic cleansing is the severest example of such tyranny, but many lesser examples also exist. In America today, this type of tyranny is becoming more and more prevalent. So called political correctness imposes severe restrictions on the Constitutional right of freedom of speech, and restricting the majority disliked actions of sub-groups has come to be considered quite normal and appropriate. The effect of such restrictions is often to turn normally law-abiding people into criminals, even though these restrictions rarely change basic attitudes and only result in the actions being hidden from public view. But it is not the type of tyranny this piece addresses.

A recent Gallop poll measured the approval rating of a number of American institutions. The results are astounding: only 54% approves of the way our police operate, only 46% approves of organized religion, only 41% approves of how our banks operate, only 34% approves of the Supreme Court, only 33% approves of our public schools, only 31% approves of our medical system, only 23% approves of television news, only 22% approves of our newspapers, only 21% approves of our criminal justice system, only 18% approves of the way big business operates, and, worst of all, only 14% approves of the actions of the Congress.

One would think that the people involved in these institutions would be ashamed of such low approval ratings and would want to do something about them. Doesn't a crisis exist when only a third or less approve of most of our fundamental institutions? Yet the people running these institutions seem to be perfectly content with things just as they are. One wonders whether these people have any self-respect. How can they not care that the people think so little of them? That they continue to conduct business as usual constitutes an inexplicable situation, reminiscent of the attitudes of Louis XVI and Tsar Nicholas II before their untimely deaths. The attitudes of these monarchs can be explained as the arrogance of power. Can the same explanation be applied to what is going on in America today?

Wealthy special interests seem to have acquired almost complete control of American institutions, especially our political institutions. Both the Democratic and Republican parties, along with the complicity of the big-corporate owned press, have succeeded in locking out any political competition. Laws, written by the politicians in both parties, make running for office as an outsider very difficult, and the press, especially the national press, manages to keep any outside contender who manages to get on the ballot out of the news by restricting access to the press and press-sponsored debates. Special interest money funds the entire process, and those special interests collect their rewards when the Congress enacts legislation favorable to them. The judges in our Federal Courts are political appointees, who far more often than not, toe the establishment line. Instead of a nation of the people, by the people, and for the people, we have a nation of special interests, by corrupt politicians, for special interests. Although we don't use the term, this system is tyrannical. The establishment has subverted our democracy.

Someone may point out that Congressmen, especially as elections approach, do concern themselves with the people's will. Unfortunately, their concern rarely amounts to more that claims of support and promises that are hardly ever provided and fulfilled. True, Congressmen prefer to be reelected, but protecting the system has a higher priority, and when defeated, they can usually count on lucrative positions in government-related, but non-governmental positions. They trade their votes for influence-peddling portfolios. Turning out one politician often merely means replacing him with another cut from the same cloth. When the Congress enacts legislation it knows a large majority of the people rejects, the arrogance of power has achieved its effect.

So can American democracy be salvaged? It took violent revolutions in France and Russia to eliminate their tyrannical governments, but revolution was easier then than it is today. Perhaps the only possibility is a drastic loss of American economic power and international influence, because defeating the establishment in any other way may very well be impossible. (6/29/2007)