Watching the "falit ce se pretinde om de afaceri" blast through all sorts of groups and entities which were flattering themselves with the pretense of being "his opposition" prior to the encounteri is certainly entertaining. If you've watched the Brexit drama, you saw basically the matinee showing of the same play, compressed a little for time and attention span, but there in all the central points, which happen to be exactly one : a popular idiot rising on a tide of popular vote represents a "crisis" of "democracy".
How could this be ?
If some smartass pigs end up eaten by a wolf because they made their house out of braided hay, would we be discussing "the crisis of architecture" ? Nay, for hay braiding is not architecture ; and moreover even if it were, the failure of the method does not invalidate the science in question, but merely the method itself. There can't not be a physics, or an architecture, or a history : for as long as there's real objects, their interaction will be studied, and there you go, physics! For as long as someone, somewhere builds anything whatsoever, architecture lives on. History is the recording and interpretation of the past, there's always going to be a past, it will by definition leave some sort of record, which will necessarily be interpreted. History isn't going away.
Specific methods, however, can and usually are invalidated. Sometimes they get abandoned, some other times they get fixed or refined, but in general even as sciences themselves are eternal and endless, methods are very strictly doomed.ii It should then be evident that any man's actions can never possibly put democracy in crisis, not anymore than Al Gore managed to put physics in crisis with his "global warming" hallucinations etcetera. And yet, the same people who confuse themselves for intellectuals (on the basis that both they and the intellectuals walk the same way down the street and sit at the table on the same part of their anatomy) managed to confuse democracy with their implementation thereof. "European democracy", "American democracy", "modern democracy" or whatever they call it.
Yet... how is this "modern democracy" related to democracy if the popular vote upsets it ? Isn't democracy supposed to be predicated exactly on the popular vote ? Isn't the theory behind the idiocy of democracy that "no matter how stupid individually, a larger collection of people will always come to better conclusions than someone who actually knows what they're doing"iii ? This is exactly what is happening now! Why isn't it doubleplusgood all of a sudden ?!
To anyone who can actually think, and on occasion does, the problem is directly obvious : the happy "intellectuals" in name only created for themselves the best situation they could conceive : a sort of monarchy without a king, ruled by the court, in the shape of a vast bureaucracy. This wonderful system allows exactly what it allowed in the historical France that spawned it : endless expenditure on idle luxury and assorted nonsense, and at the same time offers the guarantee that no pesky sovereign is going to at any point behead them, or, worse still, take them to task for what they do, or enforce any sort of responsibility for what they did. Happy land of intellectual dreamagology, forever insulated from any sort of pull of reality, oh great kingdom of the feverish mind, let's call you "modern democracy", because "headless monarchy" doesn't quite have the ring to it.
So recast, it's rather obvious why a groundswell of public indignation is spelling the end of the abomination. How could it not, how would it not. Of fucking course it's going down. What the fuck did you expect ? With or without Louis, once you spend more than you have there's a big fat penis with sharp steel spikes looking for you. In this particular case, he also has a funny straw mat up top for enhanced entertainment value.
Enjoy the ... "life of the mind", I guess.———
- The way it plays out before my eyes, it could best be summarized in the visual terminology of an ancient Russian cartoon, Ну погоди! : there's a village full of piggies, carefully building ever-more complex sties out of ever more intricately braided hay. These strong walls will certainly hold the big bad wolf at bay once he comes over. Proof for this ? Why, they're currently holding the big bad wolf at bay, aren't they ? The boat that didn't sink while it wasn't in the water is for this reason not going to sink out in the ocean, either. You understand this, yes ? This is how the world works! You didn't know ? The "intellectual" by virtue of certificate, who's never had opportunity to test whether his mind works or doesn't work in practice, is thus therefore possessed of a mind that does in fact work! And the proof for this is that... at such a time as no challenge stands before it, it behaves exactly like an actually functioning mind that'd overcome said challenge. A cardboard model of a car and an actual car idle just the same, a fly and an ox pull just as strong on a plow that's not being currently pulled, Apple could buy Russia, provided it doesn't actually have to. Then and only then, for as long as it doesn't have to (down with oppression!), for as long as it floats hapilly, irresponsibly in the hazy lala-land of "could", all's well. And once all's not quite so well anymore, for the push came to shove and the wolf is right there, blowing away the "walls" like so much chaff... well! Nobody could have predicted!
- You'd think that maybe math offers some immunity from this, but no, it doesn't - Plouffe's method of calculating the nth decimal of an irrational for instance (pi, originally) is rather recent. [↩]
- They even write computer code this way. And then we rape them, systematically, and then they wonder what could have possibly happened nobody could have predicted etcetera. [↩]