Explain This From The Thinking Housewife

[debrand]

Can you all tell me what the TH is saying?

AT The Orthosphere, Proph makes the case against consensual politics. Democracy, he writes, is a “misrepresentation … of the nature and structure of realityâ€:

Existence is not reducible to a mass of equal and sovereign wills who must agree to coordinate their movements through space in order to avoid collision. Rightness and moral law are not determined by voting or even by choice; goodness is not convertible with consent; and authority, being rooted in God, transcends individual wills. Life under a consensual political system tends to inculcate its society with the delusion that “freedom†is the highest good, with the predictable consequence that the order of being, in all its determinism, comes to be regarded as oppressive and unjust. Thus, you wind up with people demanding taxpayer-subsidized elective sex change operations — how else can we be free of the tyranny of reality?

So prosperity misrepresents man’s spiritual condition, driving him to believe (falsely) that he is self-sustaining and self-actualizing; and democracy compounds the misrepresentation by driving him to believe (also falsely) that he is by nature free, that duty is an unjust imposition, authority something to be rebelled against, and reality itself something negotiable. A bad situation, indeed, and one in dire need of correction.

I think that I know what TH is saying but I'm not certain if I am correct. Is she/he saying that democracy leads to selfishness?

[JesusFightClub]

Shorter TH: " I am a fascist."

[Conuly]

Having stuff is bad, other people shouldn't be allowed to choose things, democracy gives people the illusion that they have choices and can have things, and God is just laughing at the thought.

[chiccy]

This is the most bollocks argument ever. It's pretty audacious to argue against democracy, I'd say, but all the more audacious to attempt it when your own mind is as dim as a 5-watt bulb.

[Conuly]

This is the most bollocks argument ever. It's pretty audacious to argue against democracy, I'd say, but all the more audacious to attempt it when your own mind is as dim as a 5-watt bulb.

Then again, this rant has convinced me that if she's so adamant on the subject, she ought to just bow out of participating in the system entirely. I'm sure we won't miss her.

[2xx1xy1JD]

"Theocracy good, democracy bad."

Oh, and if things are unequal and unfair, G-d created it that way, so who are you to demand equal rights?

Among other things, this argument totally misses the point that many democratic reforms came about precisely because different people had different ideas about exact what G-d wanted, so even religious folks realized that protecting individual liberty and ruling through democracy were the only ways to peacefully ensure that everyone would be free to serve G-d as they saw fit.

[Doomed Harlottt]

The Housewife is a citizen of the U.S., but her values are fundamentally un-American. She rejects the basic Jefferson ideals of the right of citizens to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Yet she has the gall to cast herself as a defender of our civilization. She is no defender of any civilization I would want to be a part of.

[debrand]

This is the most bollocks argument ever. It's pretty audacious to argue against democracy, I'd say, but all the more audacious to attempt it when your own mind is as dim as a 5-watt bulb.

I just wanted to say that I love the word, bollocks.

This from the article where she took the quote:

Monarchy accurately represents this ontological reality: you are born the subject of a king and you are duty-bound to obey his will (at least insofar as it accords with the will of God, an even higher monarch). In a sense, it models the order of being on a social (and thus microcosmic) scale. It is also perfectly suited to Christianity and, in particular, Catholicism, saturated as it is with the language and imagery of authoritarians: God is a father, a lord, a king; he wears a crown and a rules a kingdom from His throne; the pope is His vicar on Earth and, in turn, rules the Church with absolute authority; and so on.

Because of the show Borgia on Netflix, I've taken an interest in reading about the popes. They were not good rulers. Many were interested in power instead of faith. Too much power corrupts any system and religious ones are not immune to that corruption.

http://orthosphere.org/