John Hayward Profile picture
Apr 3 20 tweets 4 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
The Great Reset vision of "democracy" with an authoritarian core includes a permanent bureaucracy, untouchable by voters, that has both the power and duty to override elections when the voters make an unacceptable choice.
Great Reset pseudo-democracy usually isn't upfront about what the unacceptable choices are, although we are coming closer to Iran-style "guardian councils" that will vet candidates and eliminate the "dangerous" ones before voters have anything to say about it.
Instead, the permanent core State takes action to disrupt and block the actions of unacceptable elected officials, working relentlessly to overturn elections by sabotage, inventing special new "rules" that only apply to certain representatives and agendas.
It's tough to find any "democracy" whose political class would agree that voters can elect anyone they support, or that electorates can pursue any agenda they find agreeable. They give lip service to democracy, but what they really mean is choosing from a very limited menu.
This mindset is a natural consequence of big-spending socialist Big Government in its various evolutionary stages - from the welfare state, to tax-and-spend liberalism, to madcap deficit spending. In each case, billions are spent to create glaciers of institutional inertia.
Seizing and spending billions of dollars on a Big Government socialist priority is a way of saying that voters will no longer have anything to say on the subject. No one gets to vote against the momentum of nine-figure spending. Good money must be thrown after bad, forever.
The bureaucracy is indestructible and beyond reform. Firing unionized federal employees or trimming the staff of titan agencies is all but impossible. Taxpayers never get their money or freedom back. There are no admissions of failure. That wouldn't be "progressive."
After decades of that, it's entirely natural that the permanent bureaucracy would view itself as a power above democracy, with a duty to ensure the electorate never casts an unacceptable vote. The government does not "serve" the people - it metes out "justice" upon them.
Government at every level has become weaponized, and those weapons will be swiftly deployed against any unacceptable candidate that wins an election, or any grassroots movement that supports an unacceptable agenda. Democracy is fenced in now, and the walls are heavily policed.
The growing list of things you're not allowed to vote for, or against, is a yardstick that measures how small democracy is becoming. You'll notice you are also increasingly forbidden to discuss these topics in public. Free speech dwindles in tandem with political freedom.
Just about every elected government in the world now includes an untouchable permanent core state of immense size. Constitutions no longer set the limits of government power; instead, government determines the limits of who, and what, the people are allowed to vote for.
One way to begin turning this around is to challenge the authoritarian core at every turn. Plucky citizens should constantly ask candidates and officials if they would respect the results of an election that demanded something they despise. Make them go viral when they say no.
Candidates who oppose the permanent state should propose - and follow up on - significant actions to cut down its power. Think big, go after our hideously incompetent and seemingly permanent institutions, and keep the status quo on permanent defense. Hammer the hell out of them.
You can't just give one or two speeches calling for some big idea, or toss it out on the debate stage now and then. It's too easy for the State's media to bury and ridicule such half-hearted rebellion. Say it often, and make it happen when you get into office. Rally the public.
Inertia and despair are big reasons we've fallen as far as we have. Authoritarian "democracy" looks reasonable to ruling elites who are long accustomed to their electorates throwing up their hands in surrender, or tearing each other to shreds for scraps from the State's table.
We talk about "accountability" a lot, but that doesn't just mean firing a few bureaucrats or tossing the most corrupt of them in jail. It means holding the SYSTEM itself accountable, taking away its money and power when it fails, breaking up the vast legions of the Army of Debt.
Think big, go big, use power to accomplish some truly revolutionary acts of dismantling the permanent State, make it clear that democracy is wholly incompatible with authoritarianism - even when the authoritarians are totally convinced of their own righteousness.
They're ALWAYS convinced of their righteousness. That's how authoritarianism always begins. That is its essence: the conviction that no one should be allowed to resist or escape "righteous" political crusades. No one should be allowed to be "wrong."
There are plenty of reforms that would break authoritarianism down and liberate Western democracy. None of them would work quickly, but all are possible with determination. Don't let the servants of the permanent State convince you that reform is unthinkable.
This is the perfect moment to strike back, after years of stunning demonstrations that the "authorities" are corrupt and foolish, that statism is vicious politics and bull-headed stupidity rather than brilliant scientific stewardship. Time for the failures to step aside. /end

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with John Hayward

John Hayward Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Doc_0

Apr 4
The next GOP candidate for president must not only propose dramatic reforms, but convince a large number of cynical and dispirited voters that he or she can, and will, implement them. An oft-betrayed party won't surge behind someone who just SAYS the right things, not any more.
That's a pretty tall order. Even candidates that seem sincere about breaking down the Leviathan State are likely to be devoured by it, or crushed beneath its bulk. Fiery campaigners can easily be distracted or misled into irrelevance when they reach the Oval Office.
Underlying the various schisms in the GOP is the difficult problem that large groups of voters are convinced this or that candidate might talk a good game, but won't actually get things done, because they lack either the tremendous amount of will or skill necessary.
Read 11 tweets
Apr 4
What a sad irony that instead of liberating discourse, the Internet became the most powerful instrument of censorship and thought suppression ever devised.
Social media introduced entirely new ways to quash free expression, including stealth techniques like shadow bans and algorithms that can leave the victims unaware they have been suppressed or censored. Ideas are not only crushed by brute force, but assassinated from the shadows.
The Internet made it possible for organized networks of "amateur" censors - often small in number, but amplified by bot hordes - to manipulate algorithms and silence targeted individuals, while remaining largely anonymous themselves.
Read 11 tweets
Mar 30
There is less reason than ever for clear-thinking Americans to place their safety, and that of their families, entirely in the hands of our monstrously incompetent, corrupt, and ideologically polarized State.
It was always wrong to compromise our right and responsibility of self-defense, but today it would be crazy to do so. The State has proven itself wholly unfit for that level of trust, especially with the Defund the Police Party in seemingly permanent control of the bureaucracy.
It would objectively foolish to compromise our 2nd Amendment rights to a self-interested government that has proven, time and again, that it feels no sense of duty to the American people as a whole. Our ruling elite is barely willing to admit Americans exist as a people at all.
Read 13 tweets
Mar 28
It is especially important for citizens to defend their right to bear arms when the ruling Party is comfortable with using street violence to achieve its political goals, and indulges the violent persecution families of its most militant followers.
Argh, stupid autocorrect, should have been "persecution fantasies." Hopefully meaning was clear from context. At any rate, we live in a world where large numbers of people are taught that violence is an understandable response to "systemic racism," 'stochastic terrorism," etc.
It's core doctrine on the Left these days that all resistance to the demands of favored grievance groups is equivalent to violence. They insist mere words are acts of violence. They have very deliberately built a social pressure cooker to keep their political troops motivated.
Read 11 tweets
Mar 24
When I was growing up, liberals were outspoken free speech advocates. Much of the culture war of the 60s-90s was justified as an attack on censorship and prudery.

Today there is no constituency on the Left for free speech at all. It is exclusively a concern of the Right.
The obvious explanation is that free speech was just a vehicle the Left rode until it had the power to begin writing speech codes. When they were the "counterculture," irreverence was the highest aspiration; now that they control the culture, irreverence is blasphemy.
I often wonder if some of the antediluvian free speech liberals - from an era when "liberal" was seen as a synonym for the Left, not an antonym, and people of the Left claimed some kinship to classical liberalism - really believed what they were saying.
Read 15 tweets
Mar 21
Yes, but if you're a political operative put in office by the world's most dangerous left-wing extremist, and your goal is to get people on the Right at each other's throats so a shambling Left-wing disaster can sleepwalk into another term in office, your standards are lower.
Frankly, the political angle works better if the case is flimsy and the prosecution is obviously politicized. That will firm up support around Trump, and those supporters will be even angrier at Republicans who don't take his side with gusto. A tight case would be less divisive.
Dems aren't worried about setting a "bad precedent" or looking "hypocritical" by pursuing a bad case. They know the rules don't apply to them. They cannot be guilted into prosecuting themselves for similar offenses. They don't fear politicized retaliation.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!