Although maybe the Cycle of Democracy is not genuinely attributable to Alexander Fraser Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee--Scottish writer, historian, lawyer, and educator of the late 18th century, and rather to an editor from the Daily Oklahoman newspaper, Elmer T. Peterson in 1951--the statement still contains some truth: "Two centuries ago, a somewhat obscure Scotsman named Tytler made this profound observation: '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 because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy.'"
Or rather, from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage. Alexis de Toqueville, who planted the seeds of the idea of American exception, even echoed himself that America's growing population would be better managed by a monarch and that democracy could only be so elastic. I wonder where the world might be in this cycle, with hysterics over the market and unrest and estrangement in the streets--on the rise or fall? Hysteria, detached and writhing like a Water-Wiggle, could be used to justify cuts to social services, just as pointing to rioters, destroying what infrastructure and opportunities for employment might remain in their neighbourhoods, might either be an expression of frustration or more justification to dismantle social-safety nets. Greed is nothing to aspire to, but neither is playing into the characterization of an angry and an idle mob nor the complacency of leaders and role-models. What's the
face of it elsewhere, and might this happen anywhere?
Or rather, from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependence; from dependence back into bondage. Alexis de Toqueville, who planted the seeds of the idea of American exception, even echoed himself that America's growing population would be better managed by a monarch and that democracy could only be so elastic. I wonder where the world might be in this cycle, with hysterics over the market and unrest and estrangement in the streets--on the rise or fall? Hysteria, detached and writhing like a Water-Wiggle, could be used to justify cuts to social services, just as pointing to rioters, destroying what infrastructure and opportunities for employment might remain in their neighbourhoods, might either be an expression of frustration or more justification to dismantle social-safety nets. Greed is nothing to aspire to, but neither is playing into the characterization of an angry and an idle mob nor the complacency of leaders and role-models. What's the face of it elsewhere, and might this happen anywhere? 
