Two levers to bring the Democrats victory in 2020

Summary: The Republicans see the Democrats’ presidential candidates and plan a victory party. But the Dems have two levers that might bring them victory. If not in 2020, in the next decade.

“A man’s foes will be they of his own household.”
— Matthew 10:36.

ID 86092871 © Michaeljayberlin, Dreamstime.

The 2020 election might resemble the Founders’ worst fears. Thanks to Trump, our clown President (elected by people who thought Sarah Palin would be a great next-in-line to be President), the Democratic Party has an opportunity to restructure America on a scale seen before only in the Civil War and New Deal. There are two levers with which they can irreversibly change America. Together they can put the Democratic Party firmly in power, for a while.

(1) Open Borders

Open borders could change America’s culture and society in a generation. A flood of new people coming with little education and few resources, knowing little of our society and values. So many people to overwhelm our mechanisms to help them assimilate (Hispanic immigrants are already assimilating at remarkably low rates). Their children will swell the numbers of our underclass – which the Left will use as further evidence of America’s corrupt nature – and demand more changes.

Until recently, most on the Left lied about their intentions. Now, a sign of their confidence, they openly state their support for open borders. This was obvious at the first debate of the presidential candidates. This week the Democratic Socialists of America convened in Atlanta for their 2019 National Convention. They are one of the largest organizations of the Left – Sanders and AOC are members. The convention overwhelmingly approved a motion calling for fully open borders (full text here).

“Be it resolved that DSA supports the demand for open borders; be it resolved that DSA supports the uninhibited transnational free movement of people, the demilitarization of the US-Mexico border, the abolition of ICE and CPB without replacement, decriminalization of immigration, full amnesty for all asylum seekers and a pathway to citizenship for all non-citizen residents.”

Why stay and fight to fix your own nation when you can move to America and get free healthcare and other benefits? The Left’s advocates for open borders do not even attempt to estimate the numbers that will come, the cost to the US government, or the effect on our society.

For more about this existential threat to America.

  1. Immigration is the key political battle of our time.
  2. The Democrats will open the borders & make a New America.
  3. Prepare for mass migrants, the greatest challenge to America.
  4. See the hidden history of immigration into America (it ruins the narrative).
  5. See the lies that keep the borders open.
  6. Our rulers make a new people for America.
  7. See prescient warnings about immigration, which we ignored.
  8. The devastating economic effect of mass migration.
  9. Election 2020 will be about open borders & America’s future.
  10. America does not need more people to stay prosperous.

(2) Free stuff for special groups

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses  …”
— Fake quote attributed to Franklin, Alexis de Tocqueville, and Alexander Fraser Tytler. But it might be true.

Free health care. Free college education. Reparations for African-Americans (disclosure: I’ll be a likely beneficiary), and then for many others. How can we not compensate Native Americans and 19th-century immigrants from Asia?

This was how the Roman Republic put itself on the fast track to destruction. The Republic’s conquests were kept by the 1%, both the land and the slaves that farmed it. The Populares wanted some of this land distributed to the soldiers whose sweat and blood won it. Instead, starting in 123 BC, Rome’s 1% began distribution of the Cura Annonae: grain sold at subsidized prices. In 62 BC, the number receiving it was expanded. In 58 BC, the number was expanded again and it was distributed for free. It played a big role in the decay of the citizenry that crashed the Republic.

Free stuff is political crack. Whatever the dose, more is needed. Offer free college, and people will attend who have no interest in learning (disruptive to the college, demoralizing to the teachers). Offer one round of reparations, there will be demands for more. Offer benefits to one group, and other groups will find they too deserve them.

Free stuff for the people did not work for Rome. It will not work for us. But it might help the Democrats win. After all, tax cuts for the rich helped Reagan, Bush Jr., and Trump win.

Trust me. You’ll feel much better after you drink this!

Mad Scientist at work
ID 99011265 © Igor Mojzes | Dreamstime.

Conclusions

After years of insisting that the Republicans were the extremists, the Democrats have revealed themselves. They have big plans for America, to test their theories about gender and race relations, about the economy, about open borders, and many other things. America’s greatest strength has been its social cohesion. These policies might irreversibly shatter it. We might learn why the Founders feared “factions” above all else.

The Left, now that they have captured the Democratic Party, intend to run these experiments in social engineering on a scale not seen since their experiments with Communism. Those were disasters, but they are confident that these experiments will end better.

They want us to be their lab rats. In 2020 we will have an opportunity to volunteer. Let’s not mistake their confidence for knowledge.

“We know what we are, but know not what we may be.”
— Ophelia in “Hamlet,” Act 4 Scene 5.

For More Information

Ideas! For shopping ideas see my recommended books and films at Amazon.

If you liked this post, like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. See all posts about populism, about Republicans and Democrats, about the Left and the Right, and especially these…

  1. The Left goes full open borders, changing America forever.
  2. Visions of America if the Left wins.
  3. The key insight: the Left hates America and will destroy it.
  4. The Democrats will own America. Their past will sink them.
  5. Sliding down the slippery slope to a new future for America.
  6. The Left crushes the Right. The counter-revolution will be ugly – Final victory is rare. There is usually a second act.
  7. The Left crushes the alt-Right, but Darwin might bring them to power – an alternative future, if the Right comes alive.
  8. Campaign 2020 shows who will mold America’s future.

Rome’s history shows us a third path to the future

The Founders looked to the Roman Republic for ideas and inspiration. In this time of peril, we too can do so. See two books about the people who were the poles of the forces that could have saved the Republic, but instead destroyed it.

Caesar – a biography by Christian Meier. He wanted to reform the Republic, but destroyed it.

Rome’s Last Citizen by Rob Goodman and Jimmy Soni – The life and legacy of Cato, the mortal enemy of Caesar. He loved the Republic, but his greater loyalty was to the 1%.

"Caesar" by Christian Meier
Available at Amazon.
Rome's Last Citizen
Available at Amazon.

13 thoughts on “Two levers to bring the Democrats victory in 2020”

  1. Free “stuff?”
    I think that health-care and education ought to be a birthright of every citizen in any reasonably civilized country.

    As for “offer free college, and people will attend who have no interest in learning” — what about entrance requirements / exams etc.
    BTW, today, the higher education isn’t about “learning” it is about getting a certificate / diploma for good outlay of money. Mind you, not only in the US; I’ve seen this deterioration on my own eyes (1/4 century in that business in Canada)…

    1. Jako,

      History shows that the demand for free-stuff is unlimited, and it is not used well. Your unrealistic thinking and disinterest in history make for fine virtue-signalling, but horrific public policy. That’s why sensible public policy uses mechanisms such as loans and co-pays – plus regulations to restain prices in goods funded by the public (aka rent-seeking, which captures much of the funding) – to see that everybody as “skin in the game.”

      “what about entrance requirements / exams etc”

      You need to get out more. Talk to some instructors at your local community college. It is dispiriting to teach to so many who have little interest in learning. Note the wide disparity between classes – some are filled with those wanting to learn (often vocational/technical courses) and those just burning time (eg, the humanity courses). This is esp bad as so much of the material is high school level – repeated because so many of our grade schools don’t work. Importing those methods into college (inevitable with free programs) will wreck (futher wreck) colleges as well.

      “the higher education isn’t about “learning” it is about getting a certificate / diploma for good outlay of money.”

      Instead of just paying people to burn 2 to 4 years of their lives without leaning much, why not just issue the paper. Nice seal, pretty words. Flooding the colleges with people who don’t want to be there will produce similar outcomes to grade schools – hordes of graduates for whom the degrees mean nothing. Employers will quickly learn this. Do you then give them more years of useless “education” and meaningless certificates?

      1. Desi,

        “and the emergence of schools that increasingly thwart rather than facilitate education. that’s because schools were designed for that purpose”

        I have talked to a lot of teachers over the years, and none agree with that theory. I can’t even imagine how to fix today’s underperforming schools (ones in upper middle class neighborhoods work quite well).

        Also, I suggest looking at this as part of a larger problem – America’s institutions are falling like a row of dominoes. That suggests the core problem is not internal to each institution – but systemic. For details, see A new, dark picture of America’s future.

      2. Larry,

        Long-time lurker, first-time poster. I think you dismiss @JaKo’s comment too easily. A frequent theme of this blog has been the US’s inability to learn from other countries and emulate their successes—in health care, for instance. This seems at odds with your disparaging comments here about free health care and free university. We can split hairs, of course, but health care in most developed nations is essentially free when compared to health care in the US. So is a university education. Are we attracting a higher caliber of student to US universities because of our high tuition costs?

        More to the point, not long ago the cost of education at many highly regarded US universities (e.g. the UC system in California) was almost free. Again, you can split hairs if you wish—students had to pay fees, buy books, etc.—but that is a rounding error compared with the cost today.

        I think a strong argument could be made that we have replaced academic rigor with financial rigor, and this needs to be addressed before making it financially easy for anyone to attend college, to weed out un-serious students. But that is not the argument you are making.

      3. Mark,

        I suggest that you reply to direct quotes, as I do. It prevents giving rebuttals to what’s not said.

        “but health care in most developed nations is essentially free when compared to health care in the US.”

        “Free” is a binary state, like pregnancy. There is no “essentially free.” Most nations provide (or require) the purchase of health insurance from the government or private insurance – with basic care heavily subsidized. Almost all have co-pays. Which is what I recommended. The single-payer systems (funded from general revenue – “free”) of Canada and the UK are among the rare exceptions, and (no surprise) among the worst (ours being the worst).

        “the point, not long ago the cost of education at many highly regarded US universities (e.g. the UC system in California) was almost free.”

        You are explicitly ignoring what I said. You appear to believe I said that education should be expensive, and have no subsidies. I said the opposite. Just that it should not be free.

        There is a second level to this. Those nations with free or very low cost college systems are moving away from that model. The UK is a well-known example. Most of those with free or very low cost systems combine them with steep entrance requirements. For example, Germany has aprox 2.6% of its population in college while the US has ~5.7%. I doubt such exclusionary policies would be acceptable in the US. There would be boosters to admit unqualified students (already happening, and increasing) – and pushing out large numbers of qualified students from the bad demographic groups.

  2. Larry, if they did go to totally open borders, so the only limit would be how much transport there was and how many people decided to come, do you have any idea how many it would be? Over, say, the first decade? We had a precedent of sorts when Merkel opened the borders. It would be huge.

    It would also be happening at a time when there isn’t the sense of national cultural legitimacy that there was when dealing with the first waves of immigration from Europe. The school systems for instance were clear that their mission was to Americanize, and they generally did it. It would not happen now.

  3. (Nearly) free college tuition and health care is hardly a radical idea. College tuition was nominal until the 80’s. (I got an MSEE for $1100 at a top state school in 1979. Today the same program costs over 20K. ) Similarly, almost every job provided health benefits for $30/ mo.
    We need to return to the past!

    1. Socialbill,

      I suggest that you reply to quotes, so that you’re replying to what I said – not words in your head.

      “(Nearly) free college tuition”

      Free is a binary state, like pregnancy. Nobody says “nearly pregnant.” The point of charging the recipient some sum is to make them have some “skin in the game.” As I explained.

      ” College tuition was nominal until the 80’s. I got an MSEE for $1100 at a top state school in 1979.”

      You must be quite a rich dude if you think $4200 (2019 equivalent to $1100 in 1979) is “nominal.” I doubt many college students agree with you. That’s roughly 560 hours of work at the net national average minimum wage.

      If your words are inaccurate, your message is lost.

Leave a Reply to Ron Stabb Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: