I sometimes say (inspired by Curtis Yarvin) that to call most of the countries of the European Union democracies is like calling the Netherlands a monarchy. This means that formal procedures are carried out as in a monarchy and monarchical symbols are displayed, but everyone knows that the king does not rule and that it is just a game. The same is true of our regime in terms of freedom of expression, other civil liberties and the ability of the people to influence government decisions.
This logically raises the question: what if the constitution were to be respected? What if censorship ended, people were no longer punished for disagreeing with the government, political agitation was removed from schools, and in cases where the vast majority of the public insisted on a certain position for a long time, the government respected it?
If this were to happen, it would be a regime change comparable to the Dutch king acquiring a military unit, occupying government buildings and actually starting to rule.
Such an attempted coup could end in one of two ways:
- It would succeed. Then we would hear that the king acted legitimately, that the Netherlands is a monarchy after all, and that he was only exercising his right.
- It would be rejected. Then the king would be labelled a dictator and an enemy of democracy.
According to Curtis Yarvin, this is exactly what is happening in America at the moment. President Trump is reclaiming powers that some presidents had in the past, but which have long since fallen into disuse.
