Oscar WildeOscar Wilde, (1854-1900) Anglo-Irish poet, novelist, writer

Oscar Wilde Quote

“Democracy means simply the bludgeoning of the people by the people for the people.”

Oscar WildeOscar Wilde
~ Oscar Wilde

The Soul of Man Under Socialism, 1891

Ratings and Comments

Mike, Norwalk

historically self explanatory

Logan, Memphis, TN

Socialism/Communism is the ultimate expression of Democracy. Whereas most Democracies contain their legitimacy within the parameters of political governance (maintaining only a superficial level of Democracy), Socialism/Communism breaks down these parameters and establishes full societal Democracy. Corporate leaders are therefore at the scrutiny of their employees, simply because the employees are in the majority. All things become "common" as property rights are destroyed, because the majority of workers revolt against the minority of business owners. Company owners are promptly removed and board members and trustees are then voted out by the employees of the corporations, as the revolution of the social majority takes over from the elitist corporate sharks. "Workers of the world unite!" Sound familiar? If anyone has actually read the Communist Manifesto, they already know that Marx's greatest ally to communism was Democracy-- in fact, it was only through Democracy that Marx said he could establish Communism. Social Democracy WAS the means whereby the violent communist revolution would take place. It was the purest form of Democracy wherein the majority Hutu savagely massacred the minority Tutsi. None of the few proponents of Democracy on this blog have yet answered what their magic Democratic number is wherein the majority can justifiably rape a women or kill a child. Proponents of Democracy are hypocritical if they support "majority rule all of the time without exception," and disagree with the Hutu carnage--> the Hutu were in the majority by at least 3:1. If majority rule all of the time is the best foundation for government and is what America is based upon, then what is the magic ratio wherein the majority in America can justifiabley infringe upon individual rights and legalize the raping of women and the killing of children? 2:1? 100,000,000:1?

  • 2
  • 1
  • Reply
Anonymous    3/11/08

I disagree with this quote also.It is my observation that the individual that wrote this quote was consumed by Apathy as it was written.

  • 1
  • Reply
RobertSRQ    3/11/08

Unfortunately, as much as I disagree with the quote, it is accurate with regard to our use of democracy. Oscar Wilde, like so many other famous orators were cynics when it came to the definition and practice of democracy; the quote is accurate with regard to the manipulation of democracy. Democracy is used by those in position of power and influence to deceive and castigate those who disagree. It’s not democracy bludgeoning the people by the people for the people but our greed and licentiousness born from direct democracy. Representative democracy is a more accurate discretion of the democracy most nations practice. So, back to Oscar,s original statement, yes, democracy with regard to majority rule is at the crux of this discussion.

Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

Some profound truth here and we must temper it with Winston Churchill's "Democracy is the worst goverment on earth except for all of the others." Would we prefer to be bludegon ourselves or have some King, Duke, Earl, serf or slave overlord or immoral industrialist bludgeon us. At least in democracy we have some say about the matter. Logan communism and socialism are economic systems. Democracy and totalitarianism are politcal systems. Socialisms as we have in this country such as public roads, sewers, schools, social security, medicare grew out of needs that the people wanted taken care of by united effort and were done in a democratic fashion.

E Archer, NYC

Unless the populace is truly knowledgable about the laws and principles of American Common Law, why should they be allowed to vote? They will only end up voting like children in a candy store. Democracy of the ignorant can only lead to self-destruction. I agree with Robert -- there are cunning people in positions of power who easily manipulate the passions of the masses for their own gain -- they are called 'politicians.' Bind them down with the chains of the Constitution!

Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

Logan if you believe that Soviet communism was democratic you have been asleep for a long time. The Russians loved it when the evil empire fell and for the first time in their lives they had free democratic elections and free enterprise. Thus your comparison of democracy to totalitarian communism is sick. Literature and history are full of stories about little towns virtually owned and operated by one person who controls all business and politics by the use of his money, threats, payoffs etcetera. When DEMOCRACY comes the town and business experience a breath of fresh air. I suggest there may be little difference in this kind of town and the former Soviet Union.

Logan, Memphis, TN

First off, "Democracy" (Capital "D") is a type and form of government; whereas, "democracy" (Small "d") is a politically convoluted term that typically describes a process. In language, we commonly associate a name brand product (Q-tip, Kleenex, Coke, etc.) to define entire product lines. We often use "Q-tip" to define a cotton swab, whether or not we're actually talking about or buying Q-tips; we often use "Kleenex" to define tissues, whether or not we're actually talking about or buying Kleenexes; we often use "Coke" to define a cola soft drink, whether or not we're actually talking about or buying Coca-Cola. The use of "democracy" (as a process) is no different. We use "democracy" or "democratic method" as a playoff of the "Democracy" name brand on any political processes wherein the people elect their leaders through voting, even though it is not the only political system (product line) of government that allows for or produces voting and majority rule or rule of the people. I'll say it again, Democracy and "democracy" are two entirely different things. Secondly, no, Waffler, Socialism and Communism are political systems that effect economic systems (I can give you half a dozen collegiate sources to verify this, if you so desire). If you really want to stretch it, then you can say that they are both (the application of Communism being political, while the philosophical goal of Communism being economic). Although he had economic goals, Marx's revolution was purely political. Soviet Russia was not Marx's Communism (neither is China or N. Korea, for that matter), but was a convoluted mess of Leninism, Marxism/Engelism, and Stalinism, with a little Khrushchev and Brezhnev on the side. I'm guessing you don't know much about politics, political theory, or the evolution of philosophy in how a thought evolves from an original source (Marx: although he wasn't very original) to how it's actually implemented (Lenin, Stalin, etc.) within a codex of laws, cabinets, and enforcements -- so let me see if I can help explain. Marx both loved and hated Democracy (Big "D"), just as he both loved and hated capitalism... He applauded the steps that capitalism had made in bringing Europe out of the Dark Ages, but sought to establish the new evolutionary jump in politics, economics, and sociology. He couldn't establish political Communism without using capitalism, because Communism, he noted, will only work for people who have experienced the capitalistic paradigm. The same applies for "Democracy." Marx's entire revolution was to bring about societal Democracy, wherein the majority of the people would rise up and overthrow not only the government, but business, religion, economics, property, etc. by the power of mere majority rule, and then put everything within the power of one centralized government that would maintain absolute societal Democracy. China, N. Korea, and the U.S.S.R. took the philosophy of Marx's Communist idea of societal Democracy and applied the outcome of societal Democracy without including the process. While I wholeheartedly disagree with Marxist philosophy, Marx himself wouldn't agree with the Communism of China, N. Korea, or of the former U.S.S.R. So, your comparison and bringing up of Soviet Russia is a non-issue. Russia made up its own form of Communism that didn't include a "democratic process." Soviet Russia (China and N. Korea) merely looked Marx's process and went straight for the results, while ignoring the societal Democracy and Marx's method of how to get there. Oh, and Waffler, don't look now, but the Russian people are actually starting to revert back to their old Communist ways... Recent polls depict a Russian populace that wants the Soviet Empire back.

Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

I think Marx would prefer America with large scale ownership of business by people in all walks of life via capital stock. Economics is about the production and distributrion of goods and services. The American economy has done it better than any in the world im my opinion. And it is not done through centralization..

E Archer, NYC

Yes, Marx would have loved America -- nearly all the 10 planks of Communism have been instituted here! He would particularly love that the country is completely bankrupt and beholden to the central bank who dictates domestic and foreign policy -- he who has the gold, makes the rules. Waffler, you do not know anything about Economics. America produces hardly anything today. It was in the 50's that America was the most productive nation in the world -- now we are the largest debtor nation in the world buying its goods from communist slave-labor markets like China. We are now bankrupt to countries like China -- Marx would have loved that! And he would have loved you, too, Waffler.

J Carlton, Calgary

I read somewhere recently the the American Communist party folded after realizing that the American system had adopted every plank of communism and that they could offer nothing different. Having said that I really wish I could provide a link, so believe what you will.

E Archer, NYC

Carlton, The history of the Communist and Socialist parties in America reveal that the Communist Party lasted the longest, however, couldn't raise enough money to campaign after the USSR stopped sending money when Gorbachev took over. The Socialist Party disappeared sooner as it split in the late '60's. Two-thirds of the Socialist party had members as delegates in the 1968 Democratic Convention. The last remnants of the Socialist Party are about 1000 members now called the Social Democrats USA. The Democrats of today have indeed adopted nearly every platform of the Socialist Party, as was the hope of the socialists who joined that party. Socialists love democracy -- imagine being able to just 'vote' to take away property that you want -- that is democracy/socialism. Afterwards, just take away the vote (or make it relatively meaningless), and then you simply have Communism (the actual goal of socialism) or perhaps worse, Fascism.

warren, olathe

Who cares what a scum bag said? Or for that matter a pervert.

majeed, Gujranwal

I think if we run the democracry on the lines given by islam that it can bring real peace and justice in the world.It is then that we call it the best form of government

Wenis, Wenis


Daniel, Toronto CANADA

I think Logan is an idiot if he thinks communism/socialism is democracy. He really needs to learn to read. I've read the Manifesto he touts. It is falsehood. Communism is the end product of altruism as a philosophy. It has killed, maimed, tortured, and destroyed more human lives than any philosophy. It reduces humans to the level of sacrificial animal. If you're a proud Communist, give me the keys to your car, comrade. I need its use. Why do you balk or hesitate? Now you've learned the difference between 'mine' and 'yours'.

RBE, Anywhere in Europe

Love it Oscar.....the pervert is you, war mongering imperialist...

Warren, olathe

I will never give a star to that worthless twit. As far as I know there is no governments on this earth that is a Democracy. Democracy has failed miserably by every country that tried it. That is why our founders decided we would not be a Democracy. The left has been moving us towards a more centralized democratic government by using referendums on ballots and constitutional amendments like the 16th and 17th. Those screwed states rights and individual rights. Both amendments were sold to the public using a plethora of lies and misrepresentations. Repeal both and this country would start to right itself because of those changes alone. 0 chance of that.


Get a Quote-a-Day!

Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box daily.