by Jack Lee
Recently Post Scripts received a surprise visit by Joseph Randolph (see pic at left) the famous American author of “Debilitating Democracy” that is now offered in hardback on Amazon. It was a delight to read Mr. Randolph’s comments and I wanted to share them with you now. They are as follows:
“In the traditional conflict between vying political philosophies the liberal represented
the progressive idealist while the conservative epitomized the unmovable realist. This
scenario predates the prominent progressivism in conservatism of late, and misses the
evolving dimension of a contemporary liberalism resembling generic and crusty conservatism. Today different postures jeopardize the conventional portrait of stagnant conservative minds stuck in the past and fluid liberal minds itching for something better tomorrow. Today’s conservative is a movable realist and has the ear of the young because of it; today’s liberal is an unmovable idealist calling for more of the same, despite empty prattle about “reinventing government.” Thus the nouns still hold, but the adjectives are courting ideologies new to them. The still politicians impugn change as irresponsible risk, and thus have limited vision for the country and the citizens.
Conservatives, however, are willing to risk something to have something greater or to scrap failed programs because of their commitment to counting consequences.
Other politicians are prone to present the risks of uncertainty as reason for staying
put. As such, these politicians are increasingly offering more provisions for voting
blocks frightened to leave home without their politician. Young people, however, are
frequently willing to risk certainty for bold opportunity, while resenting attempts to be
patronized with fear. Pessimistic politicians who thus tout bold government,
necessitated by predictions propagated to induce fear, remind them of protective
mothers warning of life outside the womb. The young are as socially-minded as they
are independent, but they do not want to be herded anymore than they like herdsmen
crying wolf.
The most vocal of these loud politicians demands security for the frightening future
they portend for voters. As these same politicians degenerate, they have skidded
increasingly toward a materialist manifesto that seizes political opportunity in the
anxiety of the voter, and particularly the voter’s kitchen table. The urgency of the next
election makes these politicians talk as if disaster is close, but any conservative answer,
such as allowing the table setters to keep more of their money, is rejected. Thus, tax
cuts are assailed by politicians reminding us that we could not predict with certainty the
economic future, and thus we would be hasty to give money back to the owners that
government might need later for the citizens.
Meanwhile, citizen appetites are whetted when candidates define themselves “for the
people.” The young prefer to pick their own candidates; there is something
condescending about candidates picking them, which might explain why opportunistic
candidates target older voters first. As protectorate of the people, such politicians submerge followers in fears that prod them to huddle behind rather than take charge.
Joseph Randolph, author of Debilitating Democracy
Review of Debilitating Democracy: In chunks of Machiavellian political cunning, politician Ramon Purefoy provides musings from the pen that salvaged Purefoy’s own nearly disastrous campaign. With his mentor’s instructions for luring wanting voters to the politician wanting votes, Purefoy’s teacher explains that nothing is ever denied citizens in exchange for their vote, and that political power can escalate tremendously after election.
To guarantee nearly permanent occupancy of elected office, the savvy politician continuously provides for the people’s every need, until such time as they realize he is the greatest need they have for taking care of their needs. The winner who creates this kind of dependency among citizens can find his political future assured as voters increasingly refuse other political alternatives. Offering trenchant advice on posturing for votes, Purefoy’s mentor treats the reader to a shocking display of disdain for responsible democracy while maneuvering for political gain. Enabling Purefoy to emerge as the winner and unmovable incumbent of any future political contest, Purefoy’s mentor now shows other political aspirants how to manipulate voter weaknesses for permanent political victory.