A New Government for America. What a concept. Something I never thought would be a serious subject - but now - realize as THE MOST SERIOUS SUBJECT facing our nation.
It's a discussion we must face now - because the WORST time to have a serious debate about government is DURING OR AFTER the collapse of said government.
 |
| http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/The_Thinker%2C_Rodin.jpg |
After 911 the U.S. Congress (U.S Congress: an assembly of venal, bribed, blackmailed tools owned by the highest bidder) - enacted the USAPatriot Act. They didn't read it - they just voted it into law for the Prez to sign - which he did - since it was ready and waiting for the perfect moment - the perfect "problem" to arise so the stage set for a panicked fear-based reactionary group of stooges would act exactly according to plan. Exactly the scenario we must avoid when thinking about our new government - if in fact - we need one.
I've heard calls for a direct Democracy - a concept that may work since we have the technology to count individual votes as fast as electrons, or "holes," or whatever mechanism it is that electricity is capable of delivering at lightspeed.
We've heard of problems with Democracy - a form of government called the "Tyranny of the Masses" or "mob rule." Is this true?
I've read accounts of the trial of Socrates - where it seems he, the Gadfly of Athens, was put to death for "corrupting the youth of Athens." Did he deserve it? Or was the public simply manipulated by clever mouth-artists into "offing" someone too troublesome for the elites to have around? You know - someone asking too many questions - someone demanding answers with the intellect to evaluate said answers - then articulately expose those answers as lies or truths?
We've heard of lynch mobs hanging blacks in the South. They were in the majority - we are told - making "Democracy" look bad - but wait - how do we know that? Maybe they were just the group with the better guns and the willingness to use them?
 |
| http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Adams |
is an explication of the reasoning for a Rebublic. In this great work Adams notes:
 |
| http://books.google.com/ebooks/reader?id=aH0NAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&pg=GBS.PA102 |
Obviously - this subject is profound and vast - there's no way I can cover the requisite topics here - in fact - I don't intend to. The purpose of this post is to set up a brainstorming session - recognizing that Democracy and Republic are not only quite different - but also both have manifold definitions - depending upon the historical context, the political context - and whatever context.
Definitions, as always, are important for the establishment of the "same sheet of music" all of us "orchestra members" must read to the "symphony" is a symphony - not an out of tune, out of tempo cacophony. And don't forget that we are talking about the law of the land here - the power of war and peace - the power of life and death - YOUR LIFE AND DEATH, YOUR LIBERTY, YOUR KIDS' LIBERTY - where staccato notes can be music - or the sound of a machine gun.
Here are some free-wheeling thoughts - not organized - not thought-through and not even edited. Just brainstorming.
I hope it is useful for our not-yet-obvious-bright-and-sunny-and-peaceful future.
1. Detachment and ignoring existing usurpers of the people's liberty
2. Transitioning peacefully into the new government
3. Deciding upon a new system to replace the failed one we have now.
a. How to get the Mike Gravel "National Referendum" idea out to the public - properly hashed out - polished - and used for a period of time to test it.
b. How can we ensure that a direct democracy will protect individual rights?
c. How can we decide exactly what is wrong with our present system? At what point can we come to consensus that the present system is not "fixable" and that an entirely new system must be emplaced? AFter all - Isn't it true that if we followed our present constitution and enforced our existing laws that the problems our country faces today would not exist?
4. Putting the first new founding fathers into office
How can a system of specific measures be designed to vet candidates? Is it possible to compile a list of minimal ethical requirements for any person to meet to hold office? Or will we end up with a "test," much like the LSAT for entry into law school that becomes nothing more than a law-business on top of a law-business?
5. Sustaining the system
How to have democratic assemblies at the local level where citizens can hash out Nationally relevant and foreign policy issues with citizens of their own town, county, city that they can look right in the eye?
How to get FACTS not Propaganda to the local assemblies so debates, reasoning, possibilities, outcomes and decisions taken are based upon sound premises ?
How to ensure honest elections? There MUST BE A SYSTEM PUT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT VOTERS ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE THEIR VOTE - AND EACH VOTE IS COUNTED PROPERLY - EVEN IF THAT MEANS PAPER BALLOTS WITH A SIGNATURE. COUNTING MECHANISMS MUST BE SET UP TO FACILITATE a system - however cumbersome - necessary to ensure the integrity of elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment