XPost: alt.anarchism, alt.politics.socialism, alt.philosophy.objectivism
From: pub?@?li.us
On Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:58:54 -0600, John Mayson wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Oct 2008, publius2k wrote:
>
>> Consider that the 2 Senators from California [with a population of over 36
million] can be
>> 'checked and balanced', vetoed, neutralized by the 2 Senators from any of
the 49 less
>> populous states, even Wyoming with a mere 1/2 million people.
>
>This was done on purpose to prevent the large states from overshadowing
>the wants and needs of the small states. US History 101. What exactly is
>your point here?
K-12 public school indoctrination that is.
Why does ONE nation, united, need a divided legislature? One part for the
haves to veto
the wishes of the havenots. That's all.
The reality is more like what Madison candidly and belatedly admitted, as
quoted in my OP.
He was terrified of equality and democracy. As he noted, any one man-one vote
system
would threaten the hoarded wealth of the 'rich and famous'.
Note Madison's remarks: "...In framing a system which we wish to last for
ages, we should
not lose sight of the changes which ages will produce. An increase of
population will of
necessity increase the proportion of those who will labor under all the
hardships of life,
and secretly sigh for a more equal distribution of its blessings. These may
in time
outnumber those who are placed above the feelings of indigence. According to
the equal
laws of suffrage, the power will slide into the hands of the former."
Heaven forbid! a leveling, an equalizing of the fruits of labor! An end to
the parasitic
leisure class.
"The man who is possessed of wealth, who lolls on his sofa or rolls in his
carriage,
cannot judge of the wants or feelings of the day-laborer. The government we
mean to erect
is intended to last for ages. The landed interest, at present, is prevalent;
but in
process of time, when we approximate to the states and kingdoms of Europe,
when the number
of landholders shall be comparatively small, through the various means of
trade and
manufactures, will not the landed interest be overbalanced in future
elections? and,
unless wisely provided against, what will become of your government?
In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the
property of
landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place."
!!!!!
Notice how it is the Republicans to day trying to prevent people from voting,
by tricks,
deceit and unethical 'legal' challenges. Same Madisonian mentality.
"If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent
interests of
the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the
government, to
support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They
ought to be
so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the
majority. The
Senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and, to answer these purposes, they
ought to
have permanency and stability. Various have been the propositions; but my
opinion is, the
longer they continue in office, the better will these views be answered."
The House of Lords, code named the Senate, was not elected by the people, but
selected by
the various state political machines which were controlled by, the filthy
rich, the
'opulent minority'. This is the ONLY 'check and balance' Madison was
interested in, a
scheme whereby the voice of a few rich parasitic land lords would cancel out
the wishes of
the vast majority, the producing workers.
That is the true function of the Senate and for a similar reason why the
President is not
elected by the people. The people merely express a preference at poll, and
then the
electorial college kicks in to insulate the decision from the people, at least
slightly.
Madison rigged the system so that the rich would control both the Senate and
the
Presidency. Then, by restricting the critical selection of the judiciary to
those two,
the rich control it also. President nominates justices, judges and federal
attorneys and
proposes treaties. The Senate 'advises' and consents. The ONLY democratic
part of this
sham is the House of Commons where the Representatives sit in proportion to the
populations of their respective districts. And they are excluded from much of
the
process.
In effect, in the constitution Madison set up a triple veto 'check and
balance' over any
popular desire presented by the House of Representatives.
Until the people wake up to that reality, changing faces of the players is
meaningless.
The rules have to be changed, in favor of the people. As it is now, when
CHANGE threatens
rule, the rules get changed. Note the new federal law being used to purge
voting lists,
with a decided impact on the poor and minority population..another great
Republican
initiative. Dems are not much better, since they too are bought out by the
investor
class. They just participate in an age-old good cop/bad cop game and nothing
much
changes. Real change will not be tolerated.
--
Said American [Indian] Chieftain Acuera in reply to
the invader de Soto's demand for submission to
the king and the church so as to 'enjoy the benefits
of 'civilization' and service:
"I have long since learned who you [European Christians] are,
through others of you who came years ago to my land;
and I already know very well what your customs and
behavior are like. To me you are professional
vagabonds who wander from place to place,
gaining your livelihood by robbing, sacking and
murdering people who have given you no offense.
... Accordingly, I and all of my people have vowed
to die a hundred deaths to maintain the freedom
of our land. This is our answer, both
for the present and forevermore."
-- "Florida of the Inca" (1591)
by El Inca [aka Garcilaso de la Vega]
- First American Author to be published.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
