The USA never has been a Democracy, regardless of what people were lied to about in school or what the nutty politicians and talking heads claim.
The ONLY thing we vote on collectively as a nation is the General election for President and VP and that is NOT determined by popular vote, rather the electoral college as outlined in the Constitution.
We are a Constitutional Republic, and THAT, is what the Proglodytes have been feverishly trying to destroy for 100 years.
Do You Believe That We Still Live In A Democracy?
Bill
2012/08/21 19:06:25
|
|
|||||
|
9 votes
|
|
39% | ||
|
0 votes
|
|
0% | ||
|
14 votes
|
|
61% | ||
"Hitler did not have to destroy democracy; he merely took advantage of
the decay of democracy and at the critical moment obtained the support
of many to whom, though they detested Hitler, he yet seemed the only man
strong enough to get things done."
Technically speaking, the United States has never been a Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic. However when I was growing up we at least PRETENDED it was a democracy. Nowadays I'm not sure why I bother to vote.
For example: I live in California. What practical purpose would voting for Romney do me in this hopelessly liberal state? The presidential election is decided by the electoral college, not the popular vote, so voting red in this state is basically a waste of time.
America voted overwhelmingly against the Dream Act. Obama ignored everyone and pronounced it as law.
In California we voted overwhelmingly against gay marriage. Once again, the vote was a waste of time because Obama overruled it.
We wanted border security and voted in leader to do the job. Obama sued every state that tried to do the job he wouldn't.
DO YOU BELIEVE AMERICA IS STILL A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT?
the decay of democracy and at the critical moment obtained the support
of many to whom, though they detested Hitler, he yet seemed the only man
strong enough to get things done."
Technically speaking, the United States has never been a Democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic. However when I was growing up we at least PRETENDED it was a democracy. Nowadays I'm not sure why I bother to vote.
For example: I live in California. What practical purpose would voting for Romney do me in this hopelessly liberal state? The presidential election is decided by the electoral college, not the popular vote, so voting red in this state is basically a waste of time.
America voted overwhelmingly against the Dream Act. Obama ignored everyone and pronounced it as law.
In California we voted overwhelmingly against gay marriage. Once again, the vote was a waste of time because Obama overruled it.
We wanted border security and voted in leader to do the job. Obama sued every state that tried to do the job he wouldn't.
DO YOU BELIEVE AMERICA IS STILL A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT?
Top Opinion
-
Schläue~© 2012/08/21 19:16:53
As soon as people figured out they could live off the FED, and others decided they could force the FED to support their pet projects. we lost our freedom.
The amount of money pumped into your political system only encourages lobby groups.
If the cash flow was cut of at the nipples and limited and rashioned towards delegates as clearly defined as part as public expenditure most of the problems could be nipped in the buttocks.
here in Australia the system has been abused by both major parties and the loopholes are closed a little slower than optimal. I think it sure beats politicians, judges etc whose election campaign funded by lobby groups only to underhandedly repay the favour through targeted legislation and precedent.
also the religious right mega churches running rampant influencing elections from the pulpit and Obama admin seems negligent to stomp it out.
Don't confuse me for an Obama supporter, I just think given the applicable joke for a choice he's kind of the best option, a lesser of evils if you will.
The USA is in the hands of the uber wealthy interests and the lack of transparency and accountability means the problems compound and become greater and greater.
The ONLY thing we vote on collectively as a nation is the General election for President and VP and that is NOT determined by popular vote, rather the electoral college as outlined in the Constitution.
We are a Constitutional Republic, and THAT, is what the Proglodytes have been feverishly trying to destroy for 100 years.
The founders of what once was the government of the U.S. understood this intuitively. They understood that governments derive their legitimacy through/by the people they govern. When they cease to have that legitimacy, they cease to exist.
I won't argue that Hussein maintained his legitimacy through fear/intimidation, but he couldn't have remained in power if his people had not chosen acquiescence over open revolt.
You can live 'as though' any time you get ready. You still have the CHOICE to capitulate or not.
" IOW, we know an effective government doesn't exist NOW, but it's still hanging in there. "
It's 'hanging in there' because people GIVE it legitimacy one ACT of capitulation at a time. When they no longer do, it will cease to exist.
"Exactly when can we stop with all the inane and stupid laws these people have passed to get their names in the National Archives?"
Exactly now. Be aware, though, that each choice you make comes with attendant consequences. You can CHOOSE to pay your taxes or not, but if you elect not to you can expect to be caught/imprisoned sooner or later.
New question: Our government is still hanging in there. But it isn't the government we have theoretically lived our entire lives in. We have been scammed in getting stuck with a little Caesar who knows nothing about much of anything. And our Congress and Courts are allowing it and doing nothing about it. At what point can we declare that without the democratic republic we have no government? And can that cut the cord around our necks?
In theory, yes. In actuality, no. We will forever be cursed with/by those who think they have a right to rule (and thus own) other human beings. What that means in practical terms is that freedom must forever be maintained.
"At what point can we declare that without the democratic republic we have no government? And can that cut the cord around our necks?"
Again, each of us can cut the cord any time we get good and ready. The problem is that the consequences for doing so can not only be harsh, but will vary according to how many people agree to cut the cord at the same time. Clearly, the more who cut the cord, the more diffuse (or 'easy') will be the consequences. The trick is getting everybody to cut the cord at more or less the same time.
Example: a tax revolt. Suppose only one or two people elected to cut the cord and pay the price. We both know that they'd end up in jail, but what would happen if a thousand people did it? A million? Ten million?
BTW, govern-ance (the actual process of governing) should not be confused with govern-ment (the institutional middle man). One, the former, is necessary. The other, the latter, is not. One can potentially be a force for good. The other is evil.
Additionally, when we speak of 'anarchy,' we should be specific as to type. Indeed, there are types of anarchy. One is absolute; another is situational. Still another is functional. Much of the U.S. existed under a functional anarchy for the first 100 years of its existence. That, incidentally, is the time when it most flourished. Human beings abhor--and do much better when they're not--being told what to do. There are certainly times when we 'must' be told not to impose ourselves on others by force, or to defraud others, but with these two exceptions/restrictions we do far better with no government at all.
Executive Order is just another word for dictatorship.