A Democrat state Senator from California who was previously indicted for corruption and gun-running conspiracy charges, but remained on the ballot for the office of secretary of state, was able to win 10% of the vote. The charges against state Sen. Leland Yee, which were covered in a March installment of Felony Friday, did not act as a deterrent to the many registered Californian voters that placed the embattled politician in third place.Officials and pundits seemed shocked by the level of support Yee was able to garner.San Jose State University political scientist Larry Gerston told the Los Angeles Times, “There will be some people who will vote for Yee because they do not know what is going on,”I have to respectfully disagree with Mr. Gerston. The majority of the individuals that voted for Leland Lee probably knew exactly what they were doing. To imply that almost 300,000 people blindly stumbled into the voting booth, without watching or reading the news does not seem plausible. In my opinion, it’s probably far more likely the high vote count for state Sen. Lee can be attributed to people sticking by their candidate, regardless of the situation. Uncovering the determining factor that led voters to remain loyal to Yee is not of paramount importance.Any way you slice it, this election is not a shining endorsement of the democratic voting process. Either 300,000 zombies walked into the voting booth, completely oblivious to the news surrounding Mr. Yee. Or the Yee voters maintained allegiance to Mr. Yee for unknown reasons. No matter which scenario or mix of scenarios you choose to believe, one fact remains constant. An indicted felon received 10% of the vote in the information age. If this isn’t evidence of the idiocy of democracy, then I don’t know what is.Not only does democracy allow scores of idiots to throw their votes away to an indicted felon, but it also encourages much more nefarious behavior. Democracy serves to legitimize majority rule by unleashing the majority ruling faction to confiscate the property of the minority and legislate morality their morality as well. This unsolicited initiation of force is given the stamp of approval by the State under the guise that the right to vote for government representatives somehow legitimizes theft and rights infringements by the State.Here at Lions of Liberty we have examined the flaws inherent in a democratic style government on many occasions. One such occasion occurred as 2012 came to a close. During this time the congressional career of Congressman Ron Paul was winding down. Before he left congress, Dr. Paul gave a farewell speech on the House floor where he posed 32 questions. Oddly enough, these questions are largely absent from mainstream political dialogue, so we took it upon ourselves to attempt to answer Dr. Paul’s questions. Our goal was to further our own education and to educate others on these very important topics. I did my best to attempt to answer the 30^th question asked by Dr. Paul, “Why Is Democracy Held In Such High Esteem When It’s The Enemy Of The Minority?” Here’s an excerpt:

Democratic voting has proven that if individuals believe they have a say in the State’s policy decisions, then they are much less likely to be opposed to the state’s infringement on property rights.  By nature, humans are a broken and selfish species.  Each one of us thinks that we know what is best for the population as a whole.  Majority rule takes this concept and puts it to the test.  It is presumptuous for those in favor of majority rule to believe that 51% of the population has found the best way to allocate decision making regarding the private property of the other 49% of the population.  To believe that this is freedom is to not believe in private property ownership.  To not believe in private property ownership is to not believe in liberty.  The ruling class, by endorsing the democratic process, is teaching individuals that it is ok to steal your neighbor’s property as long as 51% of the neighborhood agrees.

Property rights, not democracy, are the key to creating a free and prosperous society. With regard to respecting property rights, there is very little difference between a dictatorship and a democracy. The main difference is who plays the role of aggressor in each form of government. In a dictatorship it is only one person, forcibly extracting property from the population. In a democracy, the majority voting faction extracts property from the minority population. Tyranny exists in both arrangements, because tyranny is simply the initiation of force against a person or their property. A political system that embraces and legitimizes tyranny is automatically at odds with self-determination and self-ownership.Check out our past editions of Felony Friday!The Lions of Liberty are on Twitter, Facebook & Google+Receive access to ALL of our EXCLUSIVE bonus audio content – including “Conspiracy Corner”, “Degenerate Gamblers” and the “League of Liberty Podcast” by joining the Lions of Liberty Pride and supporting us on Patreon!