On Jun 16, 4:38 am, chazwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Problems.
>
> 1) There never was at any time in history a 'social contract'.
That may be true in a literal sense, although the Mayflower Compact
does fulfill much of the definition. However, in the sense which I
was speaking
("I propose"), there is a form of agreement among the citizenry as to
how they shall get along with each other.
The traffic analogy is familiar, although in Britain, you insist on
driving on the wrong side of the street. :)
My point is that there are two models of government, top-down and
bottom-up.
The bottom-up model is the one Americans most believe in.
> 2) The American constitution ... in effect a
> contract between the elite men of a collection of states
The US Constitution was the product of 13 colonies which had severe
differences of opinion on many vital matters, including (notably)
slavery. A compromise was hammered out, but one which had such
serious flaws that it led eventually to open rebellion and one of the
bloodiest civil wars in history. Further civil strife led to further
modifications, such that the rights of the landed gentry have now
become the rights of all citizens, and to some extent, even the rights
of illegal immigrants.
Flawed though it is, the essential principles of the Constitution have
sustained it for longer than any other written constitution in the
modern world (AFAIK). Those principles include the idea that
government is to be regarded somewhat like fire, a useful servant, but
a cruel master. Drawing from the English tradition, (as well as Greco-
Roman) the US Constitution enumerates specific, limited powers of
government, ensuring that there is a balance of power among the
branches, and that there are internal checks to prevent overreach.
But no constitution, even a flawless one, can compensate for a
citizenry that is not vigilant and jealous of its rights.
Overreach by the federal government in the US has become so extreme
that only belatedly is the populace beginning to awaken to the threat
of tyranny.
Laws are being passed behind closed doors--- without even having been
READ by the congressmen voting on it.
60 percent public opposition to this process has not dissuaded the
Congress from carrying on in this fashion.
Unlike in the UK, we cannot call for elections, they are scheduled on
2, 4, and 6 year intervals.
The election scheduled for November has been preceded by a number of
preliminary referenda which have put the feds on notice that they are
in for a shellacking. However, instead of pulling back, the feds have
accelerated their efforts to put in place a legislative agenda that
will be difficult to repeal.
The fear now is that they may have planned to attack Iran before the
elections, giving the government a pretext to declare a national
emergency, and to delay (or rig) elections.
If that happens, it is not likely that a popular uprising could
succeed, since the technology of counter-insurrection is far more
advanced than most people realize.
Hopefully, the feared chaos is only just that, a fear, one that will
not materialize,
But the record of this government is clear. The public be damned, we
are not yielding.
Open and honest elections in November (if held) will sweep the
Progressives from power, and the cleanup effort will begin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 3) The American constitution is out of date and its continued quoting
> to sort out various arguments that now exist in American society are
> seriously flawed.
> 4) The American constitution excluded most of society: women, slaves,
> the poor, those without land. The founding fathers never intended
> that their 'democracy' should ever included more than the circa 4% of
> the population that it set out to represent. Harping back to it, and
> the declaration of independence ignores 230 years of history of
> struggle and modification.
>
> America need to live in the present, else it will be left behind by
> its own progress.
>
> On Jun 14, 1:58 pm, Robert <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > What is government?
>
> > I propose that it is a contract among the citizenry, or more
> > precisely, the agents who execute that contract. In much the same way
> > as a home seller and a home buyer may employ a real estate agent, a
> > lawyer (barrister), a construction engineer, or other selected
> > intermediaries, so also do we as citizens of our nations, employ a
> > government to facilitate our interactions with each other in a
> > mutually acceptable way.
>
> > Of course the intermediary does not work for free. He demands and
> > receives his commission or fee. So also does government require taxes
> > to perform its duties.
>
> > But here the analogy breaks. For in no case do we allow the agent to
> > expand its power or control beyond the needs of the contract.
>
> > The currency of government is power. The more it has, the more it
> > uses that power to gain even more power. Wealthy people use their
> > money to gain even more money, and so it is with government and power.
>
> > Governments are staffed by people. These people are neither wiser nor
> > more benevolent than the ordinary citizenry. They have their own
> > personal interests in mind, and sometimes, these personal interests
> > are in conflict with the interests of the general populace.
>
> > The US Declaration of Independence states that:
>
> > "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from
> > the consent of the governed, —... whenever any Form of Government
> > becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to
> > alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its
> > foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form,
> > as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and
> > Happiness.....Governments long established should not be changed for
> > light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn
> > that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable
> > than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are
> > accustomed."
>
> > End quote.
>
> > Accordingly, an American politician, Newt Gingrich, has pointed out
> > that as Americans, we do not GIVE power to the government, but rather,
> > we lend it. And what we lend, we may recall at our discretion.
>
> > The European tradition of monarchy holds that kings have a divine
> > right to rule over their subjects. The American tradition holds that
> > it is the citizens who have inalienable rights, and not the
> > government.
>
> > The main aim of the American tradition of government is, "that
> > government is best which governs least." (unknown author, attribution
> > usually to Thomas Jefferson)
>
> > This aim is consistent with priority number one, Liberty. When
> > people are given the freedoms and responsibilities of autonomous
> > individuals, they will make wiser decisions for themselves than could
> > any self-interested agent.
>
> > Among these decisions is that of selecting a form of government which
> > first and foremost, protects the rights and freedoms of those who
> > select that government.
>
> > Government is supposed to be our servant, not our master, our agent,
> > not our parent.
>
> > Many people disagree with that, and therein lies the basis of much
> > political conflict.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Epistemology" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
