Egalitarian philosophies — Leftism is the political form of this idea, and all types of Leftism (socialism, communism, democracy, anarchy) are just variations of it — tend to behave like infections. At first, they are merely an organism co-existing with its host; later, they expand scope to want to rule the host entirely.
Leftism does this by expanding as a concept. Once you get someone to agree that all people should be equal, even if he just means when waiting in line at a snack bar, you can wedge the opening further. If people are equal that way, shouldn’t they be equal this way? The philosophy polarizes and then dominates.
Very few understand that the United States was founded on a document designed to limit two things: government and egalitarianism. It accepted that democracy would be the future form of government, and yet tried to restrain it with checks and balances and a few clear statements about what was actually intended.
In order to clarify this view, the founders wrote the Declaration of Independence as a statement against the growth of egalitarianism:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Most people have a mumbling familiarity with this passage which is quite famous in all of history. However, few understand what it is carefully saying, which is that egalitarianism is nonsense because the only equality we get is being born.
The founders intended this statement to separate “fairness” — everyone waits in line, everyone gets a fair chance in court, no one can buy special treatment — from the mission creep of egalitarianism that they could already see in Europe. They wanted to limit mob rule just as they hoped to limit government:
— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
This passage establishes that the role of government is to avoid interfering with birth-equality, and that if it steps in to engage in any social engineering — such as enforcing egalitarianism — it should be destroyed because it has become destructive.
History tells us that the Declaration of Independence makes a strong statement in favor of natural rights:
The creed “all men are created equal” means that people hold certain inalienable rights that are innate in all human beings, according to the Constitutional Rights Foundation. This stems from the idea of natural rights, meaning humans are naturally free to make their own choices and prosper.
Natural rights are the opposite of civil rights, or socially-engineered egalitarianism:
Unlike other rights concepts, such as human rights or natural rights, in which people acquire rights inherently, perhaps from God or nature, civil rights must be given and guaranteed by the power of the state. Therefore, they vary greatly over time, culture, and form of government and tend to follow societal trends that condone or abhor particular types of discrimination.
In other words, the Declaration of Independence was a document against egalitarian government, and in favor of laissez-faire naturalism, what we might today call libertarianism except that the Constitution, its amendments, and early acts clarified that the United States also arose from conservative values.
For example, the Naturalization Act of 1790 clarified who the founders intended to be citizens:
This article of legislation allowed an individual to apply for citizenship if they were a free white person, being of good character, and living in the United States for two years. Upon receiving the courts approval they took an oath of allegiance which was recorded.
Natural rights do not enter the feedback loop of expansion that civil rights and other egalitarian ideas do. Natural rights must not be impeded, but otherwise, exist independent of government; this message clashes with the idea of civil rights, or an imperative to extend equality through government action.
The doctrine of Civil Rights demands action that will suffer that feedback loop of expansion. Once we agree on equality, we start seeing other ways to apply it, and because nature is based on variation and not uniformity, we enter on an endless quest that eventually consumes all others and even our own wills. We become slaves of that ideology.
Natural rights on the other hand serves as a doctrine of amor fati, or accepting fate. We are not born identical; much of luck is life and timing; Some are Born to sweet delight / Some are Born to Endless Night. The only equality is the chance to be the best at what we are, which is why fairness applies.
The notion of natural rights descends from the idea of natural law, or that there is a pattern order larger than the individual or humanity itself at work here on Earth. We each have a role to play, and with that role come duties and privileges, in order to advance this larger order.
Some attribute this order to God, but others see it as a pattern of nature like the bell curve, fibonacci sequence, power law, or other mathematical structures found repeatedly in nature. In other words, it is a tendency that will make us powerful if we act in accord with it, and acting against it may destroy us.
The founding fathers saw mob rule and government as two sides to the same infection, based on human herd behavior as it manifests in managerial structures. Without another direction imposed upon them, human beings tend toward social thinking which is inherently egalitarian, bureaucratic, controlling, and eventually leads to tyranny.
Only a small group of people who are born with greater force of intellect and force of moral character, perhaps one percent of the population, have the ability to understand this and lead society to a level above third-world style subsistence under corrupt authoritarian leaders (tyrants).
William S. Burroughs noted that the herd spreads like an infection and becomes controlling in his classic tome of postmodern literature, Naked Lunch:
Democracy is cancerous, and bureaus are its cancer. A bureau takes root anywhere in the state, turns malignant like the Narcotic Bureau, and grows and grows, always reproducing more of its own kind, until it chokes the host if not controlled or excised. Bureaus cannot live without a host, being true parasitic organisms. (A cooperative on the other hand can live without the state. That is the road to follow. The building up of independent units to meet needs of the people who participate in the functioning of the unit. A bureau operates on opposite principles of inventing needs to justify its existence.) Bureaucracy is wrong as a cancer, a turning away from the human evolutionary direction of infinite potentials and differentiation and independent spontaneous action to the complete parasitism of a virus. (It is thought that the virus is a degeneration from more complex life-form. It may at one time have been capable of independent life. Now has fallen to the borderline between living and dead matter. It can exhibit living qualities only in a host, by using the life of another — the renunciation of life itself, a falling towards inorganic, inflexible machine, towards dead matter.) Bureaus die when the structure of the state collapse. They are as helpless and unfit for independent existence as a displaced tapeworm, or a virus that has killed the host.
As pointed out elsewhere on this site, herd behavior weaponizes individualism into collectivism, but fundamentally arises from the desire of the human individual to have power outside of natural law.
The American experiment officially failed with the rise of Barack Obama just forty years after the West was dominated by Leftist during the 1968 student protests. A limited democratic republic revealed that it in fact was just democracy because people would, over time, vote for the self-destructive and dismantle protections against mob rule.
We now see that democracy is like Ebola or sewage: one drop in a barrel of wine renders the whole thing toxic. If you want to preserve your society, you have to find another system of leadership and social order that is not democratic. Even a tiny toehold will eventually overwhelm you and create a nightmare.
This nightmare resembles the Communism of the Soviet Union in that every aspect of life is regulated by bureaucracies, although many in the West are privatized, and we rely on direct application of peer pressure by the angry herd to ostracize those who fail to be egalitarian enough (we call this political correctness).
Despite valiant efforts to save the republics in America and Europe, it is clear that this system of government has revealed that it is as suicidal as Communism and National Socialism, and will destroy us if we admit it among us. Now begins the quest for something else.