Skip to main content

Democracy: Two wolves and a lamb at lunch – voting against mob rule

Written By | Jun 30, 2019

WASHINGTON: Often historians and the media that rely on them, will speak of the “Founding Fathers.” Almost as if they are gods. We quote them. Argue the meanings of their arguments and writings. Nonetheless, the same people will, in the next moment cheer a concept diametrically opposed to that same quote. The mob rule of government.

One glaring example is the founder’s thoughts on the right to vote.  A contradiction lost on the present day thinkers.

The sea bass is the republic. the right to vote, burning sand

Most of the Founders were scholarly, erudite men. Our founders were not only writers but readers of the great teachers of bygone eras. Not only did they search the Bible, but the classic works of teachers and students of Grecian and Roman governmental innovation.

Some truths they knew:
  • Nowhere in the Bible is authorization for man to enjoy the right to govern himself through majority rule.
  • The most infamous vote for justice (or injustice) was in the ballot to save Barabbas over saving God himself.
  • The execution of Christ is one of history’s most significant examples of “mob rule.”
  • When humanity received the Ten Commandments, there was no vote on its legitimacy
The Ancient Scholars

As they were writing the Constitution and its Amendments, the writings of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle were fresh in the founder’s minds. In reading their work, no Constitutional amendments uses the phrase “right to vote.”  Not in the original text nor the Bill of Rights.  (Explore the Constitution)

The US Constitution (1789) stated in Article I, Section II, Clause I says:
“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.”

Future Constitutional Amendments did amend the US Constitution stated in Amendment XIV (1868)

“But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.” – US Constitution (104 KB)  

What is written defines how citizens can be denied the right to vote.  They do not define a specific “right to vote”:

15th Amendment (1870) is:

Our republic has a code of laws, the Constitution,  that “allows” persons to vote for the persons as elected by the people of the community of the republic. But as originally written, the role of voting rights has changed as evidenced by the Amendments to the Consitution.

Women, for example, were not denied the “right” to vote. Instead, in keeping with the times, married women would, as general marriage compliance, vote with their husbands. Therefore, unmarried women would be disadvantaged as to married couples.

When Democrat candidates offer everything free for all

However, the Founding Fathers and their attempts at creating an orderly republic relying on the votes of those “deemed qualified”, is flogged by contemporary historians. The result is that the Founders it seems were okay guys for their time, but old fashioned.

Is it any wonder that we view a stage of presidential candidates that are no more than buffoons offering concepts such as a man’s right to get an abortion. These idiots onstage are a result of an ambitious thrust toward universal suffrage, .ie. A mob rule government.

In Why did the Romans execute Jesus? we read:
“I felt that if we could make the Jewish High Priest a realistic and three-dimensional human character that would be a great step forward. I am so pleased that we now understand his motivations,” says Mark. “The key to that is political.”
In the ancient world, there was no democracy so the biggest threat to a leader like Caiaphas was that people might rise up and riot. Mob rule was the only way people could depose a leader.

As Franklin says,  Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.

Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.  The wolves representing the mob, the lamb those who would stand up against threats to the republic not with guns, but with their vote.  Votes against threats like Socialism and the ability for any group of Americans to remove the Constitutional rights of all Americans.

Franklin also saying 

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.”

Our recent Democrat Debates showed candidates for President debating for free college, free healthcare for citizens and illegals, free guaranteed income and free abortion on demand, even for men? Candidate, NY Mayor Bill de Blasio promising to seize your money and give it to who deserve it much more than you do.

“Yes, we’re supposed to be for 70 percent tax rate on the wealthy,” he said. “You hear folks say there’s not enough money. What I say to them every single time is there’s plenty of money in this world. There’s plenty of money in this country. It’s just in the wrong hands.”

Little did Benjamin Franklin know that some 240 years after his warning, the left would adopt the seizure of wealth through voting as the most successful political tactic in recorded history.

Moreover, it appears the mob will rule well into the future.

Great thinkers thoughts on voting democracy

“A lady asked Dr. Franklin Well Doctor what have we got a republic or a monarchy. A republic replied the Doctor if you can keep it.” – The American Historical Review

vote, voting rights, democracy, republic, mob rule, constitutional amendments

President Lyndon B. Johnson meets with civil rights activists before signing the Voting Rights Act. Left to right: two unidentified men, John Lewis and James Farmer. (Yoichi Okamoto/LBJ Library)

“This right to vote is the basic right without which all others are meaningless. It gives people, people as individuals, control over their own destinies.” President Lyndon B. Johnson addresses Congress before signing the Voting Rights Act of 1965.  – Lyndon B. Johnson

Liberals and politicians deciding your, his and her, right to vote

“Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).” – Ayn Rand

Coming back to Socrates

Socrates did not believe democracy by mob rule. Unthinking people following the emotional stranglehold of a political group, he taught. Which does sum up how voting in America is evolving today.

Socrates was found guilty of corrupting youth for demanding that it is important that they think about their “vote.” Not just follow the hysteria. For his crime, Socrates, one of our father’s of philosophy, was put to death by hemlock poisoning.

“Who would you ideally want deciding who was in charge of the vessel, just anyone, or people educated in the rules and demands of seafaring?” – Socrates

Tags: ,

Paul H. Yarbrough

Born in Mississippi, now calling Texas home, Paul H. Yarbrough is bringing his writing talents to the political arena. Yarbrough has completed three novels. He is also the humorist behind the weekly column, Redneck Diary.