Shadows Over Brasília: The Unseen Election Handlers | Eduardo Vasco

The counting of votes in the first round of Brazil's general elections was the subject of great controversy. Flávio Bolsonaro, son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, was ahead of Lula in the official count, with 49.6%, against 42.2% for the president seeking re-election.

 » As long as I count the Votes, what are you going to do about it? « 
Thomas Nast, Harper's Weekly, October 7, 1871.

The Sixty-Minute Blackout

64.8% of the polling stations had been tallied up to that point. But the count was halted for more than an hour. Strangely, the votes for governor, senator and deputies continued to be counted normally. Only the presidential count was halted. The count was halted at 7:06 p.m. (Brasília time), with 64.8% of the ballots tallied. Only at 8:08 p.m. were the new results presented, already with 84.96% of the ballots tallied.

A Statistical Inversion

And, even more strangely, when the presidential count resumed, Flávio Bolsonaro's upward trend and Lula's downward trend were reversed. The opposition candidate's votes plummeted, while those of the current president rose. Flávio Bolsonaro was less than 0.5% away from the victory that would hand him the presidential sash. He lost more than 2%, ending with 47.03%, while Lula gained almost 3%, ending with 45.16%. It seemed that Flávio Bolsonaro would dethrone Lula right in the first round. But, after more than an hour of halted counting, Lula managed to recover and the race will only be decided in the second round.

 

Lula's disastrous tenure combined a globalist woke socialist agenda, incompetence, staggering
corruption and clientelism, surging crime, political censorship and persecution, and Global South

treason: vetoing Venezuela’s BRICS membership, empty populist anti-US propaganda, hollow

peacenik Ukraine/Gaza/Iran rhetoric, and cheating on the Russia and China alliances. 

He was Obama's and Biden's pet, and the CIA rigged elections for him.

The Infallibility Paradox

The official justification was given by the president of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE), Kassio Nunes Marques, who is also a justice on the Supreme Federal Court (STF). "What happened was a data congestion. In every election, we are surprised by some incident, which is natural for those who deal with complex and highly varied systems," he said. "At first, it is not known whether this was derived from another problem. What our IT found was a flow [of data] above the normal level, and that congestion caused a delay," he added.

Servicing empire, genocide, oligarchy, deception and raw treason unveiled: Milei and

Bolsonaro, Latin America's ultimate Zionist golems and submissive Mossad-CIA stooges. 

Both are Trump's and Netanyahu's pets, and they rig elections for them.  

 

There is an aggressive propaganda campaign in Brazil, spearheaded by the Electoral Justice, to convince citizens that elections are 100% clean. The main focus of this propaganda is precisely the electronic voting machines. Judicial institutions and media outlets give wide dissemination to the Electoral Justice's claims about the total reliability of the electronic voting machines, even highlighting that they are tested before the election and then sealed so that no one can access them.

So why did the machines suffer a kind of breakdown, if they had been rigorously tested? Well, the oh-so-wise TSE has full knowledge of the number of eligible voters and of the number of votes that can be recorded in the machines, including in each polling station. The Electoral Justice's propaganda tells the public that the machines are fully prepared in advance to record and tally voters' votes perfectly.

The "New Left" abandoned class struggle and fighting the oligarchy for identity politics and climate protection, bankrolled and directed by the CIA, USAID, NED, IRI, NDI, CIPE, the Solidarity Center, Soros NGOs, and globalist oligarchs. While 'left-leaning' billionaires weaponized a horizontal culture war to turn the masses against each other, 'right-leaning' oligarchs and foundations—Koch Brothers, Musk, Atlas Network, The Madrid Forum, etcetera—engineered pro-US, pro-Israeli Zionist leaders, narcos, and sociopaths to secure control. Divide and rule. It works. Now enter the reapers.

No flow of data "above the normal level" that would lead to system congestion should occur, because the most varied data and statistics regarding vote recording are known and the calculations are perfectly feasible. The infallibility of the electronic voting machines requires that all possible outcomes be predictable and that, therefore, there be no anomaly whatsoever.

Jair Bolsonaro (Flavio's father) speaking in 2017 at the Brasília Masonic lodge

about governance problems, and the need for a non-obstructive president.

 

Flavio Bolsonaro campaigning in 2026 in English and invoking "God bless Israel"

 —a textbook case of the "New Right's" mental colonization and degeneracy.

 

» Lord, give me the opportunity to be president of Brazil, because I

believe it is Your project. Give me wisdom, courage, strength, and

health to do the best work for the Brazilian people. Heal our nation. «  

An Evangelical Zionist wannabe divine project manager’s TV prayer.

 

Fresh off a meeting with genocide high priest Netanyahu, young Flávio—the "God, family, and fatherland" crusader out to "crush socialism in Brazil"—was baptized in the Jordan River earlier this year. A more joyful part of the Evangelical's hastening Armageddon cult, obviously.

So how is it possible, then, that such a perfect system—as it is portrayed by the institutions of the Brazilian State—suffers a failure which, once supposedly resolved, so radically changed the trend of the presidential votes?

The High Priests of the Algorithm

It may be a coincidence that Flávio Bolsonaro plummeted and Lula rose after the voting machines failed. But who knows? The TSE president acknowledged that the electronic voting system is "complex." Only highly qualified specialists, from the TSE itself and from technology companies, can access it and understand it, according to the Electoral Justice. Thus, the fate of an entire country for the next four years rests in the hands of these specialists—150 technicians unknown to the public. The tally of votes from the machines is fully automated; it passes through no human being. An even more select number of 22 employees access the automated vote totalization.

» Washington think tanks still consider Brazil a "swing state," and controlling the policies of South

America's industrial giant remains central to US efforts to limit and sabotage BRICS in the region. « 

This means that 214 million Brazilians need to trust those 150 or 22 Egyptian priests to interpret that occult science. They must be the most enlightened beings on planet Earth—100% honest, upright, immaculate and virginal. Even the STF justices, who over the past 15 years have been presented as impeccable, virtuous and chaste individuals, now appear embroiled in the biggest corruption scandal in Brazil's recent history, yet those anonymous specialists deserve citizens' most absolute trust.

Lessons from Karlsruhe

It was for reasons such as these that the Supreme Court of Germany declared electronic voting unconstitutional: 

"Every citizen must be able to understand and verify the central stages of elections in a reliable manner and without any prior specialized technical knowledge."

The verdict, dated 2009, concludes:

"An electoral procedure in which the voter cannot reliably understand whether his or her vote was recorded in an unfalsifiable manner and included in the tally of the election result, and how the total of votes cast is assigned and counted, excludes central elements of the electoral procedure from public scrutiny and therefore fails to meet constitutional requirements."

Judicial Partisanship and the Spectacle of Choice

The Brazilian judicial system is mired in its greatest crisis in history and is living through a true Wild West, with partisan feuds interfering in the functioning of its work. Partisanship, in fact, has contaminated most of the judiciary, including the TSE. In the final stretch of these elections, decisions by the Electoral Justice, backed by the dominant wing of the STF, favored Lula.

John Kiriakou: » Credible evidence that the CIA is involved. « 

 

It is evident that this dominant wing (represented by justices Alexandre de Moraes, Gilmar Mendes and Flávio Dino) does not want a victory of Bolsonarismo, for it is their declared political enemy. These justices have acted, in recent years, as true vigilantes against Bolsonarismo. Now that they themselves have been caught in extremely promiscuous dealings with a banker who corrupted countless high-ranking state officials, their bureaucratic careers are threatened. 

 

Brazil? » We have a lot to do there. « 

 US Southern Command General Laura J. Richardson, 2023.

Lula's continuity is a hope of salvation for these gentlemen, for the president is beholden to them and cannot break that commitment without risking his own neck, given the level of dependence Lula has contracted toward the STF's top brass. Meanwhile, a Flávio Bolsonaro victory would tend to lead to a clash with the heads of these institutions—although the opposition candidate himself has shown little willingness to confront them, because those who control elections in Brazil (international financial capital) demand moderation and pacification, otherwise they will make life difficult for anyone elected president.

And the people are treated like cattle, victims of a system they cannot understand, so that their exploitation may be perpetuated through the staging of the "festival of democracy."

Quoted from:
Eduardo Vasco (October 7, 2026) - Electronic voting machines are not reliable.

 

See also:

Lucas Leiroz (October 7, 2026) - Brazil’s runoff: what factors will determine the electoral outcome?

 Raphael Machado (October 6, 2026) - Lula's contradictions finally take their toll.

The Curse of Democracy | Russell Geoffrey Banks

How true it was when Plato said, "Democracy does not choose the best leader; it chooses the best liar." And this is why every single democracy fails eventually. Democracy does not reward wisdom; it rewards persuasion. The one who understands reality loses to the one who can manipulate perception. The honest lose to the charming. The dedicated lose to the theatrical. Plato said the heaviest penalty for decline in power was to be ruled by someone inferior.

 

 

 » Tyranny naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated

form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty. « 

Plato, The Republic, Book VIII, around 375 BC.

 

And that was not moral advice; that was the law of power. When competence withdraws, manipulation advances. When truth is costly, lies become efficient. And when popularity decides authority, deception is always the strategy. Democracy does not collapse from the outside. It hollows itself from within, and when the lies finally shake the system, the ending is predictable. The people don't resist tyranny; they beg for it. That's how bad things have to get: they beg for it.

The Psychology of Revolution | Gustave Le Bon

In his 1913 analysis of The Psychology of Revolution, French physician and polymath Gustave Le Bon (1841-1931) argues that "political revolutions" are abrupt upheavals driven primarily by "affective and mystic elements" rather than "rational discourse," which he attributes to the "erosion of established traditions" and the "contagious spread of discontent."

 

"A revolution is effected from above, that is, by the leaders of the old regime; but when it is victorious it is rapidly vulgarised, because the people interferes and applies the only means in its power—violence. To destroy is within its scope; to reconstruct is beyond it. [...] The instinctive soul of the people is above all remarkable for its extreme mobility. Deceived by its own chimeras, it enthusiastically applauds its idols of a day, to overthrow them the next day in favour of others. No gods ever long survived its favour. This mobility renders the people credulous and ignorant at the same time. 

 

» An individual in a crowd is a grain of sand, which the wind stirs up at will. « 

Gustave Le Bon, The Crowd, 1896.

 

Le Bon argues that during political revolutions, individuals are driven more by inherent character traits than by intellect, with certain mentalities rising to prominence amid chaos:

  

[...] We have seen in all times apostles arise who have had an irresistible influence over the popular mind by cultivating its instincts and speaking its language. The people always follows them with enthusiasm, whether they be ignorant fanatics, hard and upright logicians, ferocious maniacs, or eloquent speakers. Whatever their aims, the leaders of the people are obliged to enter into reciprocity with it, to recognise its psychology, even if they do not share its sentiments. They must be in communion with it, or they will not act upon it. 

 

» The people loves equality, but it respects titles and prestige. «

 

[...] When a political party triumphs, all the forces of interest, ambition, and hatred which parties contain become enlisted in its service, so that the triumph of a political revolution is always accompanied by a complete overthrow of all the institutions of a country. The chief result of a revolution is to sweep away the forces which held together the edifice of government, which was perhaps already tottering, and to substitute for them nothing but the will of the victors, which is for that reason all-powerful. 

 

» Irresistible influence over the popular mind. «

  

[....] A revolution cannot change the soul of a people. This soul commands, and all must obey. It is for this reason that after a revolution the laws and institutions of a people are so often in contradiction with the interests of the new rulers, and also with the prescriptions of pure reason. But presently the laws are modified or abrogated, until they are more or less adapted to necessities. When the dogma which serves as the base of a revolution is victorious, the dissociated social elements which have resulted from the destruction of the old institutions become agglomerated under the action of new ideas."

Le Bon dissects the role of "the people" in such revolutions, distinguishing between the "conservative majority" and a "subversive minority" prone to violence. He argues that the masses are often manipulated and contribute mainly through destructive acts rather than constructive change:

 

"1. The Meaning of the Word 'People:' The term 'people' represents merely the superior portion of a nation. It comprises an elite: the nobility, clergy, magistrates, etc. By extension it was applied to the whole nation, and finally it has come to mean the most inferior elements of the population, the lower populace. We shall examine it in this last sense, and shall show what part the people plays in revolutions. From the political point of view the people may be considered in two aspects—as an army and as a crowd. As an organised army it plays the part of follower. As a crowd it is often revolutionary. 

 

» To become the master of the people one must know how to dazzle it. « 

 

2. How the People regards Revolutions: The revolutions are sometimes regarded with favour by the people, because they represent the triumph of its claims. But the people quickly becomes indifferent, and seeks only tranquility. It is always the people that suffers in revolutions, for it pays the cost in blood and poverty. It is for this reason that it often acclaims the return of a master. 

 

» To destroy is within its scope; to reconstruct is beyond it. «

  

3. The Psychology of Revolutionary Crowds: The revolutionary crowd is formed of transitory elements, recruited from all classes, but chiefly from the instinctive and criminal categories. It is the crowd that acclaims or murders kings, and whose violence has always been the principal factor of revolutions. The psychology of revolutionary crowds shows us that they possess the ordinary mental characteristics of all crowds: contagion, unconsciousness, exaggerated sentiments, intolerance, etc. They are above all remarkable for their credulity and their docility towards their leaders. 

4. The Part of the Leaders in Popular Movements: Although the people in rebellion generally begins by destroying everything, it soon grows weary of anarchy, and instinctively seeks a leader. It loves equality, but it respects titles and prestige. It was thus that all the great popular movements—those of the Reformation, the Revolution, etc.—were effected under the guidance of leaders. 

  

 » The people always follows apostles with enthusiasm. «

[...] From the preceding considerations we may draw the following conclusions: (1) The people, by reason of its instinctive soul, accepts without discussion the ideas presented to it. (2) By reason of its sentimental soul it incarnates these ideas in leaders, to whom it often delegates the direction of its destinies. (3) By reason of its mobile soul it personifies all its sentiments in a fetich. To become the master of the people one must know how to dazzle it, be able to make it hope, and if necessary know how to deceive it. (4) Finally, the leader must possess prestige, speak in images, incessantly repeat the same ideas in different terms, and know how to act by persuasion and never by reasoning." 

 

Le Bon further elaborates on the role of leaders and contagion in precipitating political revolutions, noting that discontent alone is insufficient without amplification through suggestion: 

 

"The role of the leader in all revolutions is very considerable. He does not create the beliefs which provoke them, but he directs them. Without him they would often remain latent and ineffectual. Although the revolution which overthrew the Bourbon dynasty was ripe, we know from the memoirs of contemporaries that without the prestige of Lafayette it would probably have remained nothing but a local riot. Whenever a revolution breaks out in one point of a territory, we see similar revolutions breaking out in succession in all the countries which surround it, even when communication is difficult. It was thus that in 1848 all Europe was inflamed by the revolutionary conflagration, and was shaken by it in spite of the slowness and difficulty of communication."

 

Le Bon finally examines the outcomes of political revolutions as often involving the establishment of new power structures, persecutions, and limited social transformations:

 

"Contrary to what occurred in religious revolutions, political revolutions show us merely peoples adapting themselves to new conditions of existence. We have already seen that this adaptation is effected by means of slow successive evolutions, which render violent revolutions useless. [...] The results of political revolutions being merely displacements of wealth and the triumph of certain classes, we may conclude, contrary to the general opinion, that they have been without psychological significance. They strike the imagination because they are accompanied by much violence, and blood flows in streams.

 

» Contagion, unconsciousness, exaggerated sentiments, intolerance, etc. «

 

But when we look a little closer we soon find that the economic or social changes which result from them are very slight. The importance of political revolutions must not, however, be exaggerated. They sometimes cost a country very dear, although they change nothing in respect of its natural conditions. It is especially when they involve disastrous wars that their results are most pernicious." 

 

Reference:

Gustave Le Bon (1913) - The Psychology of Revolution. 

 

See also:

Gustave Le Bon (1913) - The Psychology of Revolution. (complete audiobook) 

Alexander L. Chizhevsky (1922) - Mass Excitability during Solar Cycle 25 (2019–2030).

The West's Dystopia: War, Fragmentation, and Perversity | Emmanuel Todd

Trump’s perversity is unfolding in the Middle East, NATO’s warmongering in Europe. [...] Such is our world as we approach 2026. The dislocation of the West takes the form of a ‘hierarchical fracture’.

» One of the fundamental concepts of the West’s defeat is nihilism.  «

The United States is giving up control of Russia and, I increasingly believe, of China. Blockaded by China for its imports of samarium, a rare earth element essential to military aeronautics, the United States can no longer dream of confronting China militarily. The rest of the world – India, Brazil, the Arab world, Africa – is taking advantage of this and slipping away. But the United States is turning vigorously against its European and East Asian ‘allies’ in a final effort at overexploitation and, it must be admitted, out of sheer spite. To escape their humiliation, to hide their weakness from the world and from themselves, they are punishing Europe. The Empire is devouring itself. This is the meaning of the tariffs and forced investments imposed by Trump on Europeans, who have become colonial subjects in a shrinking empire rather than partners. The era of liberal democracies standing in solidarity is over.

 

[...] Cutting the European continent in half economically was an act of suicidal madness. [...] The rage resulting from defeat is leading each country to turn against those weaker than itself in order to vent its resentment. The United States is turning against Europe and Japan. France is reactivating its conflict with Algeria, its former colony. There is no doubt that Germany, which, from Scholz to Merz, has agreed to obey the United States, will turn its humiliation against its weaker European partners. My own country, France, seems to me to be the most threatened.
 

[...] One of the interesting features of America today is that its leaders are finding it increasingly difficult to distinguish between internal and external issues, despite MAGA’s attempt to stop immigration from the south with a wall. The army fires on boats leaving Venezuela, bombs Iran, enters the centres of Democratic cities in the United States, and sponsors the Israeli air force for an attack on Qatar, where there is a huge American base. Any science fiction reader will recognise in this disturbing list the beginnings of a descent into dystopia, that is, a negative world where power, fragmentation, hierarchy, violence, poverty and perversity intermingle.

 

So let us remain ourselves, outside America. Let us retain our perception of the inside and the outside, our sense of proportion, our contact with reality, our conception of what is right and beautiful. Let us not allow ourselves to be dragged into a headlong rush to war by our own European leaders, those privileged individuals lost in history, desperate at having been defeated, terrified at the idea of one day being judged by their peoples. And above all, above all, let us continue to reflect on the meaning of things.

Quoted from:
Emmanuel Todd (September 28, 2025)  - The dislocation of the West: what threatens us.

(from the preface to the 2025 Slovenian publication of La Défaite de l'Occident) 

Emmanuel Todd, one of the last phenotypical old-school French intellectuals, is a historian, sociologist, demographer, statistician, anthropologist and political scientist at the National Institute of Demographic Studies (INED) in Paris. A prominent critic of the US, globalization, and European integration, he is best known for predicting the collapse of the Soviet Union (La Chute Finale, 1976), After the Empire (2002) and his 2024 book The Defeat of the West. 

See also:

 Emmanuel Todd (January 11, 2024) - La Défaite de l'Occident (The Defeat of the West; Todd rejects an English edition).

The "Iron Law of Oligarchy" and the Delusion of Democracy | Neema Parvini

One of the primary issues with democracy is the "Iron Law of Oligarchy," as described by Robert Michels. Although democracy promises equality and freedom, an elite class inevitably holds power. Whether Professor Peabody, Sally Strawberry, or Pedro Orange is in office, an elite class persists. Even when one elite group is replaced by another, such as a shift from peas to strawberries, the system remains fundamentally unchanged. 

 

 Comrade Build Nation (特朗同志) aka MAGA Traitor (MAGA 叛徒) aka Genocide Don (种族灭绝唐). 

 

Michels' "Iron Law of Oligarchy" argues that the egalitarianism democracy promises are an illusion. Elites always emerge; even if the masses overthrow one, they soon create another. James Burnham, in "The Machiavellians," expands on this, asserting that any realistic political analysis must accept elites' inevitable dominance. This elite dominance reflects the Pareto principle, suggesting a natural 80/20 split between elites and society. 

» The oligarchy is a layer separated from the people. Sustained by privilege, wealth, speculation, and control of bureaucracy, it lacks a vital bond with the community. The elite directs the people's energy toward a common goal, takes risks alongside them, while the oligarchy does not. The oligarchy lives off the people's resources, manipulates them to maintain its position, and shields itself from any demand for responsibility it always avoids. Thus, the notion that the big fish eats the small one is unjust and mistaken, because the elite is the principle of life for a people, while the oligarchy is the principle of their decay. «

Francisco José Fernández-Cruz Sequera, 2025.

Plato ("The Republic," Book VI) and Aristotle ("Politics," Book IV) warned against direct majority rule, fearing tyranny of the majority and mob rule. In his "Discourses on Livy," Niccolò Machiavelli shared this view, citing the Gracchi brothers, Tiberius and Gaius, in 2nd-century BC Rome. Their land reforms to redistribute wealth from the aristocracy to the poor led to bloodshed and civil war. Machiavelli argued that the Gracchi erred in assuming the poor were less self-interested than the wealthy. By seeking the masses' approval, they fueled hatred between plebeians and the Senate, ultimately destroying the Roman Republic.

 

 

 Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto:

The Intractable Problem of Democracy.

 

» The heirs began to degenerate from their ancestors, and, abandoning virtuous deeds, thought that princes had nothing to do but surpass others in luxury, lasciviousness, and every other kind of pleasure. Thus, the prince, becoming hated, and fearing because of this hatred, turned to tyranny, and many of those who helped establish it became its enemies.

These, conspiring together, brought about its ruin. And so the cycle continues. «
Discourses on Livy, Book I, Chapter 2, Niccolò Machiavelli, 1531. 

Machiavelli described a cyclical pattern where democracy transitions to tyranny. A wise and just ruler, the "prince," leads initially, but his successor often indulges in luxury, resulting in tyranny. An aristocratic class overthrows this tyranny, establishing a new government, but these aristocrats also become corrupt, ushering in anarchy and renewed tyranny. Machiavelli proposed a mixed government—a republic—where monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy are institutionally represented. This form is more stable and enduring than pure democracies or oligarchies, as exemplified by the Spartan Republic, which lasted 800 years compared to shorter cycles elsewhere.

 

 

» A hundred men acting uniformly in concert, with a common understanding, will triumph

over a thousand men who are not in accord and can therefore be dealt with one by one. «
Gaetano Mosca, 1896.

Despite this mixed government, challenges persist. In the 18th century, David Hume identified factionalism as a major democratic flaw. He argued that people naturally form factions based on personal interests, often undermining the common good. Even trivial differences, as seen in ancient Greek factions or recent civil wars, can spark factionalism. Modern democracies still face factions driven by religion, politics, or personal rivalries.

 

» The more the Devil has, the more he wants to have. «

Engraving by Jacques Lagniet, 1657.

 
James Madison, in his "Federalist Paper No. 10," addressed factions, proposing two solutions: removing their causes or controlling their effects. Eliminating causes requires abolishing liberty, which is impractical and undesirable. Controlling effects is more feasible. Madison argued that large republics dilute factional harm through diverse interests, making domination by one faction harder and offering voters more choices, thus reducing corrupt candidates' influence. However, Madison's vision did not anticipate political parties, now central to modern politics, nor the impact of communication tools like radio, television, and the internet, which amplify factional organization and influence.

 

» Oligarchy always rests upon force and fraud. «
George Orwell, 1946.

 

Mancur Olson, in "The Logic of Collective Action," identified another issue: large groups with shared interests struggle to organize due to high costs, while smaller, organized special interest groups effectively influence policy, even against the majority's interests. These groups often secure their goals, disregarding the public’s benefit. 

 

» Sovereign is he who decides on the exception. «
Political Theology, Carl Schmitt, 1922.

 

For example, candidates Sunny Strawberry and Lucy Lemon, running for office, receive offers from special interest groups like the Peas, Aubergines, and Pears, seeking government funding or tax breaks. To win, Sunny might pledge favors to these groups, even if the broader population gains nothing. If she refuses, the groups may support Lucy, who offers similar deals. This system ensures special interest groups dominate policy, leaving the general population underrepresented.

 

» You great star! What would your happiness be had you not those for whom you shine! «
Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche, 1883.

 

The general public, lacking special interests, struggles to organize and advocate for their agenda. Consequently, their needs are often overlooked in favor of well-resourced lobbies. Madison's republic and modern democracies face significant challenges. Representatives often prioritize electoral success over the common good, and their policies may fail without consequence. These systemic issues pose serious problems for modern democracies, and while solutions are elusive, recognizing and addressing these flaws is crucial.

 

Reference:

Neema Parvini (2019)  - Elite Theory: Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto. (video)
Neema Parvini (2018)  - The Intractable Problem of Democracy. (video)

 

See also:

Neema Parvini (2022) - The Populist Delusion. 

Neema Parvini (2022) - The Liberal Political Theology.  

Ernst Jünger (1977) - The Forest Passage. (Der Waldgang) 

Imam Khomeini (1970) - Guardianship of the Islamic Jurist. (ولایت فقیه) 

 Mancur Olson (1965) - The Logic of Collective Action.

George Orwell (1946) - James Burnham and the Managerial Revolution. 

 James Burnham (1943) - The Machiavellians: Defenders of Freedom.

 Carl Schmitt (1922) - Political Theology. Four Chapters on the Concept of Sovereignty. (Politische Theologie)

 Robert Michels (1915) - Political parties; a sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy.

(Zur Soziologie des Parteiwesens in der modernen Demokratie) 

Vilfredo Pareto (1916) - The Mind and Society. (Trattato di sociologia generale)  

Gaetano Mosca (1896) - The Ruling Class. (Elementi di scienza política)

 Gaetano Mosca (1896) - The Rulers and the Ruled.

Juan Donoso Cortés (1851) - Essays on Catholicism, Liberalism, and Socialism.

(Ensayo sobre el catolicismo, el liberalismo y el socialismo)

James Madison (1787)  - The Federalist Papers : No. 10. 

David Hume (1741) - Essay XXII: Of the Parties of Great Britain.

Niccolò Machiavelli (1531) - Discourses on Livy. (Discorsi sopra la prima deca di Tito Livio) 

Aristotle (350 BCE) - Politics.
Plato (375 BCE) - The Republic.

 

了解你的敌人
Know your Enemies.