title: hillary is a real christian says michael moore
text: public faith in elections falls as the state grows outofcontrol state power ryan mcmaken  misesorg  october   comments 
  in the wake of the final presidential election debate last week the mainstream media was appalled that donald trump would not preemptively agree to not contest the outcome of the election  
  trumps position reflects a growing faction of americans who doubt the integrity and honesty of the american electoral system in response mainstream media sources have responded by vehemently insisting that rigged elections are  a myth  
  while rarely stated explicitly the way american electoral politics is supposed to work is this the population spends several months listening to the candidates accuse each other of terrible crimes horrible ideas and gross incompetence each candidate lists the ways he or she will use the power of government to force the winners policy preferences on the losers then once the votes are cast everyone is supposed to quickly accept the results ignore everything that was said during the campaign and immediately accept the winner as having an indisputable mandate to rule over everyone including the sizable minority  or even the majority in many cases  who either voted against the winner or abstained if there appears to be any irregularities in the vote well those should just be ignored because it would tear the country apart to drag out the election if half the country feels its been cheated well tough luck and better luck next time democracy breaks down as perceived interventionism increases 
  this model can only work indefinitely under certain specific conditions it can be workable when there is a perception that government is limited in its power and extensive or abrupt change to government institutions are thought to be rare it can also work in a small culturally uniform society where there is a relatively small divide between socioeconomic and ethnic groups 
  in the case of the united states however it appears that neither of these conditions apply 
  in the age of presidential executive orders militarized police uncountable federal laws and a myriad of spy agencies empowered to watch americans every move gone is the perception that a loss in an electoral contest should simply be accepted without question the president says he can issue laws with  a pen and  a phone  without any need to consult congress the libya war proved presidents can invade any country without so much as a debate in congress meanwhile the untouchable supreme court hands down decisions that are equivalent to constitutional amendments some of which can have enormous effects on the daily lives of ordinary citizens 
  in other words the stakes are now reaching the point where an attitude of better luck next time doesnt cut it whether or not these fears are at times overstated is irrelevant the fact is the perception of democratic lawlessness is growing 
  this situation is further complicated by the fact that the united states is an enormous conglomeration of different cultural and socioeconomic groups spread out over a vast and varied geography many of these different groups distrust each other and in a country where the president and the judiciary now rule largely by proclamation there is reason to be fearful when the other guys candidate wins and yours loses democracy can work when the stakes are low 
  contrary to the naive musings of some nostalgic conservatives the united states was never united into a single cultural linguistic or socioeconomic group those differences may have reached a low point during the twentieth century but they were far larger in the th century than they are today 
  when you have a diverse population however the problem of who controls the government becomes far more important and this concern grows as the state becomes more powerful writing on the topic of immigration and nationalism in australia  ludwig von mises noted how powerful states exacerbate the problem of cultural divides could a laissezfaire regime be guaranteed to all residents of australia mises notes it would not matter at all if there were cultural mistrust between englishdescended australians and asian newcomers however since laissezfaire liberalism has not been embraced a familiar problem presented itself 
  the present inhabitants of australia fear that some day they could be reduced to a minority in their own country and that they would then have to suffer all the horrors of national persecution to which for instance the germans are today ie the early s exposed in czechoslovakia italy and poland 
  it cannot be denied that these fears are justified because of the enormous power that today stands at the command of the state a national minority must expect the worst from a majority of a different nationality as long as the state is granted the vast powers which it has today and which public opinion considers to be its right the thought of having to live in a state whose government is in the hands of members of a foreign nationality is positively terrifying it is frightful to live in a state in which at every turn one is exposed to persecution  masquerading under the guise of justice  by a ruling majority it is dreadful to be handicapped even as a child in school on account of ones nationality and to be in the wrong before every judicial and administrative authority because one belongs to a national minority 
  it is clear that no solution of the problem of immigration is possible if one adheres to the ideal of the interventionist state which meddles in every field of human activity or to that of the socialist state only the adoption of the liberal program could make the problem of immigration which today seems insoluble completely disappear in an australia governed according to liberal principles what difficulties could arise from the fact that in some parts of the continent japanese and in other parts englishmen were in the majority 
  these same principles can be applied outside the subject of immigration as well the existence of an interventionist state means any country composed of diverse ethnic and socioeconomic groups faces the same problem of one group being exploited by another group with the help of state power change the term nationality to political party or interest groups and one has a fair approximation of the problem of democracy in any interventionist state 
  in the presence of a relatively weak government however these concerns are often overstated at the turn of the th century in the us for example the fact that spanishspeakers were in the majority in new mexico and many areas of the american west was irrelevant to the lives of the vast majority of americans the fact that japanese immigrants and their descendant were outcompeting white businessmen in california was simply not a matter of national importance the fact that oregon attempted to outlaw catholic schools was not a matter for presidential executive orders thanks to widespread suspicion of federal power at the time the lack of a strong federal judiciary and a relatively weak presidency meant these issues remained largely local while public policy was haphazard 
  voters have always feared losses in elections but now more than ever the voters may be justified in refusing to simply accept the outcomes of elections under an interventionist state which meddles in every field of human activity when that is the case elections are not something to be taken lightly trumps remarks about rigged elections  and public fears over the outcome  are to be expected from voters with an immense fear of outofcontrol state power 
  in response to all of this the pundits and government class will tell us that everyone must double down on democracy and that elections  specifically federal ones are sacred rituals never to be questioned there will be a double standard of course a trump victory will be questioned by the media and powerful politicians but in that case it will be the fault of the russians  and not anything wrong with the system itself the solution for the feds of course will be a federal takeover of the election system if clinton wins then no questioning of the system will be tolerated at all to question the outcome or the wisdom of these presidential contests will be denounced as scarcely less than sacrilege 
  the true solution to the problem remains far more practical however to paraphrase mises it is clear that no solution of the problem of elections is possible if one adheres to the ideal of the interventionist state so long as elections are increasingly perceived to be referenda on which side shall use the power of the state to crush the other side faith in the electoral system will erode and the potential for real violence will increase newsletter sign up get the latest breaking news  specials from alex jones and the infowars crew related articles