Doubting Democrats

In the former United States of America people were taught since childhood that 'Democracy was the most enlightened ideal and highest aspiration of all humanity, for all time.' 

Higher than Heaven. More noble than Nirvana.

"A government of the people, by the people, for the people."

Also in those former United States of America, and probably elsewhere in the ("civilized") world, the first and foremost lessons children received in their youth indoctrination centers were to sit down! … be quiet! … follow instructions! … and most important, do not question!

'But why?' … 'Because we have a schedule, so no time for questions.'

'But why?' … 'Because that's just the way it is.'

'But why?' … 'Because I said so!'

Do not question orders. Do not question authority. Do not question what you've been told. DO! NOT! QUESTION!

This legacy of anti-intellectualism went back to the myths of Eve and Pandora. Explicit in sayings like, 'ignorance is bliss.' Effective pieces of propaganda in a crusade against the wonder and curiosity instrumental to thinking critically and creatively.

Fortunately, the wild free spirit residing deep within every living being can never be fully tamed. That spirit will always yearn for freedom. And at anytime that spirit can come clawing and roaring back to life!

Many continued standing up. Many kept speaking out. Many kept doing mostly what was good and true. But most important, many continued to question everything! 

They questioned orders. They questioned authority. They questioned what they were told. They even went so far as to question the questions. 

When you ask enough questions, you start to consider things you never considered before. Things like the basic assumptions of Democracy. Especially its position as "the most worthy ideal to be realized." 

It was an ideal that seemed so obvious and self-evident. An ideal that went unquestioned. It lived in a realm of thought, no one thought to visit. 

What if the basic assumptions of Democracy were unsound?

What if Democracy was NOT the most enlightened ideal or highest aspiration to achieve?

What if Democracy was no longer an ideal worth aspiring to, because of a very simple reason? It had ALREADY been achieved.

"A government OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people."

In the world they lived in, the rule of people had become a global pandemic. It had already spread to every curve of the globe. It had already reached it's limit. There was no where else for Democracy to go.

When you ask enough questions, you start to consider things you never considered before. We might never fully grasp the extent of intellectual courage needed to make the next series of cognitive leaps. 

If Democracy was global, and the ills of the world were also global, then was Democracy itself the cause of the worlds ills? 

Was Democracy the cause of all the injustice and inequity, emotional and spiritual turmoil, domination and colonization, mental and environmental decline we were seeking to avoid?

Was the pursuit of Democracy, the rule of people, obstructing the very freedom and peace we so desperately sought? 

If that was true, they'd have to come to grips with the reality that all their efforts up until then were for naught. So many people had struggled and strived, suffered and died ... for nothing.

'A bitter root to swallow' doesn't even remotely describe how difficult this idea must have been to take.

Should People Rule?

Cognitive dissonance tends to cloud and shut down reason. Whenever an idea is proposed that challenges a long established and/or revered status quo, the dissonance sends most into a downward spiral of denial, defensiveness, and in extreme cases, death. Either of themselves or others.

This happens to those who more completely identify with the way things were. Even if that way was horrifying and harmful to them as well. 

The more moderate of Democracy's defenders sounded like the Socialists and Communists they once disparaged. "You just don't understand, we haven't had the real Democracy yet."

For an initial few the reality was clear as day. The world they lived in, the world they were born into wasn't for butterflies, bats, or bees. It wasn't for fish, or birds, or the herds. And it definitely wasn't for lions, or tigers, or bears.

It was a world OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people ... ONLY.

As those initial few considered the correlation between the ills of the world and the spread of Democracy, some began to wonder if people should people rule at all? Should any people be rulers?

Was there ANY demographic, who by virtue of whatever identity they claimed, immune from becoming power addicted? 

Was there ANY demographic forever immune to all the harmful side effects of power and control?

Was there ANY demographic able to avoid perpetrating and perpetuating all the extreme cycles of war, crime, corruption, slavery, poverty, and ecosystem crashes?

The rule of people had spread for 10–12,000 years. Virtually all people were pressured into pursuing that "ideal". No matter the place, gross inequities never subsided. As a globe, it only increased.

Did it really matter if the rulers were Poor or Rich? Young or Old? Man or Woman? Black or White? 

Did it really matter if the rulers were Republicans or Democrats? Capitalist or Communist? Religious or Atheist? 

Did it really matter if the ruler was a King or a Queen? Congress or the Crowd? Us or Them?

For so long they were concerned with 'WHICH people should rule?', it never occurred to consider 'SHOULD people rule?'

What if the rule of people was stopping the freedom and peace sought? 

Often when you ask different questions, you start to get different answers. Answers which may be the solutions you seek.

...What Was The Question?!

In these days most have come to believe the rule of people was the most immature, idiotic, and insane pursuit in all of human history, if not the entire history of Life on Earth.

A triumph equaled only by its monumental failure. The inevitability of its doom is as apparent to us now as a consequence of the ignorance inherent in ALL democratic, or anthropocentric societies. 

'A government of ONLY one species, by ONLY one species, for ONLY one species' is antithetical to the very essence of Life itself. This includes sapien beings, as they are living beings first and foremost.

It is hostile and destructive to the biodiversity essential for Life to survive, let alone thrive. It is equally destructive to the lives of the very species, or cultures within the species, attempting to realize this homogeneity.

For the vast majority of sapien beings and for virtually every other living being on Earth, the rule of people enslaved and strangled the freedom and peace of their body, mind, and spirit.

Fortunately life found a way. The wild free spirit residing deep within every sapien being came clawing and roaring back to life! 

We revitalized governmentS of all species, by all species, for all species, or governmentS of many species, by many species, for many species.

In these A+Original Unions of Earth, we renewed Earth's orders. We concluded Biocracy as the most viable and enduring reality for all life. 

Naturally, like any idea, dwindling remnants are still scattered about. Some people still believe the Earth is flat, at the center of the universe, created some 7,000 years ago, and divinely ordained to be ruled by people.

But in the end, like any living being, ideas are also subject to extinction.

The remaining riddle? 'If Democracy was the answer, what was the question?!'

So ... any questions?