As the curtain too slowly descends on the J6 ceremonies Democrats used to beat up conservatives, it’s important for us to look at what’s behind the “democracy is in danger” narrative that the media is so obsessed with.
A Google search of “democracy in danger” will show you that much of American media is incessantly banging the drum about it. And they have been banging that drum even before the events of January 6, 2021.
BuzzFeed features “Democracy Is In Danger” prominently on its heading, similar to the coronavirus case count that the media exploited until President Joe Biden took office.
But a few recent admissions by people in the media show that democracy is not really in danger so much as the U.S. Constitution is in danger by the very people crying wolf about democracy.
“Democracy is not just the enemy of the Republican Party,” Brooklyn College professor Corey Robin told Politico. “It is also the enemy of the Constitution. Americans associate the Constitution with popular liberties such as due process and freedom of speech. They overlook its architecture of state power, which erects formidable barriers to equal representation and majority rule in all three branches of government.”
Liberals are out of their mind crazy that despite holding the White House, the House of Representatives and the Senate by virtue of the tie-breaking vote of the vice president, they can’t get more radical legislation passed, that they can’t take control of the Supreme Court and they can’t just govern by fiat.
That’s what liberals really mean when they say “democracy is in danger.”
And as the midterm elections that they are likely to lose inch closer and closer, they find their attempts to pass radical legislation frustrated, they will likely get more frantic.
A good example is Ian Millhiser, a senior correspondent at Vox who covers the Supreme Court and rages about democracy being in danger, who called the Supreme Court’s ability to rule on the constitutionality of laws “a conspiracy.”
“The idea that there’s this unelected tribunal of nine people in black robes, and they get to interpret a vague document [the Constitution] to veto any law, sounds like a conspiracy theory,” Millhiser said about the Supreme Court. Millhiser also wants to abolish the Senate because he thinks it’s a danger to “democracy” as each state has equal representation in the Senate to offset the over-representation that they get in the House.
Millhiser has said that Democrats in the Senate represent 41 million more people than the Republicans in the Senate.
That may be true by virtue of holding two seats each in the Senate in big urban states, like in the Northeast, New York and California. But not everybody in those states supports the Democrats. A more comprehensive look at the political split in the country would be the popular vote where Biden gained 4% more than Trump in 2020. That’s not an overwhelming majority.
“Folks act like abolishing the Senate is a radical idea,” Millhiser said. “My view is that giving every person in Wyoming 68 times as much representation as someone from California is a radical idea.”
Yet California still sends a Congressional delegation of 55 people to D.C., versus Wyoming’s three total representatives in the House and Senate.
What Millhiser is really objecting to is that the Constitution is purposefully made for this very eventuality.
It prevents a small, temporary majority from ruling over a minority.
The Constitution also slows down radical change through several election cycles so that citizens have a chance to judge whether the changes they voted for last year are the status quo that they will approve next year.
Ninety-five percent of the time, voters have second thoughts after voting for a president and the president’s party loses seats in the midterm elections, according to FiveThirtyEight.
“Since the end of World War II, the president’s party has consistently gotten a lower share of the national House popular vote in the midterm than in the prior presidential election,” said the pundits there.
What Millhiser and Robin aren’t telling you is that the United States was not designed to be a democracy, although it’s often characterized that way. Although the United States has some features of democratic government, the founders realized that majority rule was often unsafe, so they designed a system where the majority would rule over time through a consensus.
It’s that form of government that those in the press who oppose the Constitution and claim “democracy is in danger” threaten today.