Hey, rightwing hypocrites, justify your ‘revolution’ scam plus anti-democratic ‘tyranny of the minority’

Bad losers don’t get to make themselves winners or the whole structure crumbles – and then might makes right.


Either we honor majority rule, thus certified elections – or we cancel” the Constitution.

Any movement, real, mock or delusional, must satisfy minimal thresholds – or get laughed off the stage as a palpable fraud. That’s even truer when disruptive mobs invoke the talisman of “revolution.” First, insurgents must define some big, bad, plausible menace, like King George, Czarist oppression, or parasitic, spendthrift aristocrats. The “Deep State” or election fraud might work, but not without a scintilla of proof, let alone incontrovertible evidence of a conspiracy among diverse (red) state election officials. Black Lives Matter succeeds because of unarguable, distressingly-public police brutality against minorities, conveying bias, cruelty and systemic oppression.

Then comes the necessity to clarify the whys and wherefores that justify the urgency of change, especially driven by “any means necessary.” How about a clear mission statement, target audience, certainly a realistic agenda to achieve goals? Any call to arms demands organization, then education and a coherent protest plan against authority, whether strikes, violence, non-violence, whatever gums up the gears of the status quo. All the while, savvy activists anticipate counter-revolutionary punishment, learning what property and liberty will be at risk. No successful movement comes by chance or without high cost: planning and strategy are all. And without either, failed objectors simply light noisy fire-crackers, the impact dissipating with the smoke.

By such standards, how does the mock Trumpian “revolution” stand up? How about a D-, failing to provide a plausible, real-world enemy, justification for action, or any blueprint for what might follow the first shot across the bow. What defines Trump’s enraged mob stands opposite to what make a good revolutionary: no coherence, no direction, no consciousness-raising – not even a bad manifesto. There was no “Trump Capitol movement” – just a bunch of deranged suckers sacrificing themselves because the leader thought it good publicity – or good for fundraising. Know-nothings with criminal intentions were manipulated (banking on pardons, ha!) – and Trump walked away without penalty.

The Poppycock Revolution

Sure, a desperate, unhinged president incited insurrection, but Trump’s amateurs were only good at selfies and grandstanding, without a clue about movement leadership. Perhaps like Trump, his mobsters banked in magic thinking, hoping that ransacking the Capitol and murdering police were sure to galvanize national support. The Thug-in-chief sent a mob of equally dim thugs, thus instigating a destructive one-off stunt. The insurrection culminated the gross negligence of his entire presidency.

Neither Trump, nor QAnon, nor white supremacists, nor Stop the Steal liars offered more than cartoon mock-ups to justify truly vicious violence. There IS a dangerous, entrenched elite, far more corporate than governmental. But what Democrats worship (wholly obsolete) Satan or cannibalize kidnapped children (you mean, like those caged at the border)? Crude, white supremacy is an obsession decades past its pull date, and the Stolen Election Big Lie only exposed low-brow cheaters trying to cheat by falsely alleging cheating. The poppycock Trump phony revolution. Bravo! Trump mobsters were more lucky than smart to succeed at all; yet as quickly as they took the building, they fled like scared ducklings. Who but Trumpers conflate selfies and flag waving with meaningful activism? Who causes havoc, then steals a few toys and goes home? Considering the incriminating evidence left at the scene, why didn’t these brainiacs just walk to the closest police station?

Overthrowing majority rule

Even more obviously AWOL is any statement to justify the abusive power play called the tyranny of the minority. To accept secular democracy is to agree that all the people hold all of the sovereignty, thus more voters tell fewer people how things will go. No one objects to the freedom of any minority to hold strong views, even think themselves absolutely right. Go for it, but in an electoral democracy, you must convince the voting majority. The minority doesn’t get to act like God, or a tyrant, however, they claim God is on their side. The double arrogance of minority tyranny comes not only from certainty they are incapable of error, but that such absoluteness merits leverage over everyone else. That is the worst, most presumptuous sin against representative democracy: to act as if the minority can change the rules without respecting others, all to get their way. They should be in charge because they say so. How facile.

If that’s the case, we have to cancel the Constitution and countless laws, for even the Supreme Court is bound by majority rule, just like Congress, state houses, commissions and review boards. Yes, some changes (Constitutional amendments) demand super-majorities, but that exception proves the rule (reforming the basics rules merits a higher threshold). For the tyranny of the minority to operate, that minority must propose a Constitution amendment (or many), pass Congress and the Supreme Court, then win 2/3s of the states. However, that puts the arrogant minority in direct conflict with the will of the majority, who would never willingly concede full sovereignty.

Of course, we have systemic checks against majority rule (beware the hoi polloi), famously in the Senate (with drastically unequal representation of population), worsened by its extralegal filibuster novelty. Supreme Court justices are not chosen by popular vote, so rarely represent the people (dramatically skewered today, with six Catholics, two Jews, and one Anglican). But five of nine is absolute.

In a larger sense, any honorable voter accepts the implicit contract, knowing each is one of many. No one votes with certainty their candidate will win, an arrangement necessary to do voting. Either 50% plus one (certified after challenges) defines a winner, or we’re just going through the motions. No one says the majority cannot err, and a later majority rightly makes changes. If you don’t like our system, don’t vote or call for a Constitutional Convention. The Confederacy had that option but chose instead to go to war, thus violating the implicit Union contract, lasting four score and twenty, to which Lincoln proved they were honor bound.

Violating the first democratic commandment

Thus when declaring (in advance) his election is rigged, bereft of even bad evidence, Trump violates the first commandment of our electoral democracy. When a bad cheater continues the obvious ruse, that outlaw behavior deserves ostracism. Bad losers don’t get to make themselves winners or the whole structure crumbles – and then might make right (tyranny of the strongest military). The extremist Trump insurrection didn’t even win over the GOP establishment. Thus, the smirking McConnell Cheshire cat openly admitted his Republican president caused the appalling lawbreaking. Tens of thousands of ex-Trump voters knew criminal stupidity when they saw it, subsequently fleeing the party.

In short, no political movement, let alone a revolution, gets to first base by blatantly disrespecting everyone else – indeed, further offending those fed up with bad lies and cartoon logic. Electoral democracy spoke and not following the elemental commandment, then outrageously, stupidly invading the Capital exposed the emptiness of the whole Trump scam. Trump started by scamming just enough minority votes to win the Electoral College, another manifestly anti-democratic leftover that deserves the dump. But if the final Trump triple whammy – a criminal insurrection based on a self-evident election lie driven by tyranny of the minority arrogance – isn’t enough to kill Trumpism, what is? I still say Trump is done as a national candidate and belongs, with the Electoral College, in the dumpster. Make room for Lindsay Graham.


If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.

Previous articleEmpire State Building powered completely with renewable energy
Next articleThe Fourth Reich
For over a decade, Robert S. Becker's independent, rebel-rousing essays on politics and culture analyze overall trends, history, implications, messaging and frameworks. He has been published widely, aside from Nation of Change and RSN, with extensive credits from OpEdNews (as senior editor), Alternet, Salon, Truthdig, Smirking Chimp, Dandelion Salad, Beyond Chron, and the SF Chronicle. Educated at Rutgers College, N.J. (B.A. English) and U.C. Berkeley (Ph.D. English), Becker left university teaching (Northwestern, then U. Chicago) for business, founding SOTA Industries, a top American high end audio company he ran from '80 to '92. From '92-02, he was an anti-gravel mining activist while doing marketing, business and writing consulting. Since then, he seeks out insight, even wit in the shadows, without ideology or righteousness across the current mayhem of American politics.