Changes

In comparison with the philosophy of libertarianism, Mercer states that of the ancients, Aristotle was “the most agreeable to libertarian thinking,” saying that he “ventured that democracy is based on a false assumption of equality.” For this, Mercer draws on William Durant’s ''The Story of Philosophy:'' “those who are equal in one respect (under the law) are equal in all respects. Because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal.”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref>  

In comparison with the philosophy of libertarianism, Mercer states that of the ancients, Aristotle was “the most agreeable to libertarian thinking,” saying that he “ventured that democracy is based on a false assumption of equality.” For this, Mercer draws on William Durant’s ''The Story of Philosophy:'' “those who are equal in one respect (under the law) are equal in all respects. Because men are equally free, they claim to be absolutely equal.”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref>  

On the subject of the United States, Mercer shifts her focus to Alexis de Tocqueville and Friedrich Nietzsche, stating that the former was “not sold on the idea of American democracy,” and the latter “saw nothing good in democracy,”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref> but reiterating that “For their part, America’s founders had attempted to forestall raw democracy by devising a republic.”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref>

On the subject of the United States, Mercer shifts her focus to Alexis de Tocqueville and Friedrich Nietzsche, stating that the former was “not sold on the idea of American democracy,” and the latter “saw nothing good in democracy,”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref> but reiterating that “For their part, America’s founders had attempted to forestall raw democracy by devising a republic.”<ref>https://misesuk.org/2019/10/22/how-democracy-made-us-dumb/</ref>

 

 

 

Mercer is an opponent of Critical Race Theory (CRT), stating that it’s a “a specious, subintelligent concoction, originated by subpar intellectuals.”<ref>https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/10/the-problem-is-systemic-anti-whiteness/</ref> However, she breaks with the standard Right-Wing orthodoxy that often refers to the CRT teachings as a “rehashing of Marxism,”<ref>https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/one-brave-professor-calls-crt-marxism/</ref>and labels it “Institutionalized, systemic anti-whiteness, yoked to white hot, hatred of whites”,<ref>https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/10/the-problem-is-systemic-anti-whiteness/</ref> also observing that it is “considered politically incorrect or ‘racist’ to advocate on behalf of whites—even if whites qua whites are being dangerously maligned and marginalized; even if there is an anti-white sentiment that runs through our institutions, both public and private.”<ref>https://www.wnd.com/2019/09/conservatives-ignore-white-hating-politics/</ref> In support, Mercer has argued<ref>https://townhall.com/columnists/ilanamercer/2019/03/01/its-not-identity-politics-its-antiwhite-politics-n2542461</ref>further that “Blacks are not being pitted against Hispanics. Hispanics are not being sicced on Asians, and Ameri-Indians aren’t being urged to attack the groups just mentioned. Rather, they’re all piling on honky. Hence, anti-white politics or animus. The multicultural multitudes are gunning for whites and their putative privilege.”<ref>https://amgreatness.com/2021/05/10/the-problem-is-systemic-anti-whiteness/</ref>