Bi-Partisan Monopoly, speak your mind!

[Osborn F Enready]

(continuation)

These changes include:
The creation of the Federal Bank, recall of all Gold and Silver.
The adoption of the "War and Emergency Powers Act".
The creation of a "safety net" welfare system, socialist inspired.
The effective regulation and encroachment by state or federal levels, on all rights in the Bill of Rights.
The unchecked expansion of government, that led to, and especially after the Great Depression.
Federal Regulation and overwatch of all media mediums, except the internet, which is now under review.

In essence, what I am saying is that corruption exists in ALL societies, and probably in ALL people to some extent. It was the libertarian free market system the Constitution specifies, that was INTENDED to keep check on these known forms of corruption, but admittedly fell short in some areas that could be easily addressed. Over time, and extreme wealth creation as well as technological change, the American people have been placated with promises of education and liberty, while being sold into economic and social servitude at a piecemeal rate, under the guise of "progressivism". The danger of an open, free society is that it is its own greatest weakness. The efficiency of the system is directly tied to the education, and the attention of the governed. In a society that provides such an expansive, all encompassing free market, and a multitude of avenues of educational investment, it is easy to see why the masses become so preoccupied on niceties and luxuries of capitalism, and invest to further their ideals and passions. It is when these intrests and passions become political tools, or motivators, that the people should be wary, for when our intrests are used to further fragment, as opposed to further unify, we the people must step in if we expect to keep any semblance of a free, peaceful, voluntary union.

As you can see from the wise words of Mr. Washington, these tools of furthering corruption were well known, and known to be easily concealed under the guise of legitimate power. Add to those wise words, the ever growing facts of national and international conspiracy such as "Operation Mockingbird", and every sworn testament in any court to the notion, and you have a very comprehensive picture to the Architecture of Modern Political Power, in all nations.

We the laborers, the thinkers, the designers, the artistic are but tools of political hegemony to the governments we endorse and empower with our own labor, our own sweat, our own devotion through simply partaking and using the system with which they have emplaced slowly, over our original system.

Without a level playing field (absence of economic, information or private material monopolies) , the public on all levels can be "conditioned" through one abuse or another. Each and every one has a singular goal, and that is manipulation of LABOR, which is the ONLY thing that truly has value. Food cultivation, processing and sales requires labor if for anything other than personal sustinence.
Once done for more than personal sustinence, the final food product derives its value from the labor used to put it to market. Commodity mining, refining, processing and utilization is dependent on labor, which is where its value is derived. All things, ideas and material invention and goods, are dependent, therfore intrinsically tied to labor.

The U.S. Constitution RECOGNIZES a mans right to own property, to be secure in privacy on that property, as well as the rights to do what he wishes with that property, whether for home or business. He has a right to believe in a God of his choosing, or no God at all. He has a right to be viewed as equal to his peers, and no man stands higher than he in any standing court under the Constitution of the United States. He has a right to presumption of innocence, until proven guilty beyond the shadow of a doubt, before a jury of his peers, his trust in them as theirs would be in him were the shoe on the other foot. He has a right to live as he sees fit, to bond and barter with whom he chooses, at his own discretion. He has a right of conveyance across all land under the union, except that where private ownership forbids, as he too is recognized the right to do with his own land.
He is recognized as an upright, intellectual being, with the capacity of reason and responsibility for actions he may take. He is recognized not only the right own, but to bare arms should need be for national defense from all enemies, foreign or domestic, bound by the code established in the Constitution, and the rights of all men enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

All of these rights, and others, depend on the people having access to freedom of speech, political disourse, and a free media with which to inform and educate the people. They also equally depend on the will and action of the people to stay active and aware of government actions keeping them transparent and open to public scrutiny, and to form competent oversight and discourse when necessary to maintain a government that is dependent on WILLFULL citizen co-operation.

Overall, rights reside within the individual. The individual is the last resort of society, to exercise and protect the rights of citizens. It lies in the will and the ability of the individual to resist undue encroachment against the overwhelming ties of power against him, in the case of power gone awry.

Every single problem in the United States today, could be fixed constitutionally, and all un-constitutional laws stricken from the books. A few minor modifications pertaining to term limits, citizen oversight, political party funding, election reform and pork barrel politics and this nation could once again become the true testament to what is the American Experiment.

Pubmanager said:
I realise that this veiw could easily be dimissed as an over-simplification, however it is meant as a starting point for discussion. I am also mindful that when debating property rights, an equally complex issue, with a libertarian I was told "keep it simple, stupid".

I say:
I hope you didn't take that the wrong way when I said to keep it simple. It is a saying I have used for a long time, and in the sense I meant it was to imply to keep it to simple logic, and not get too involved with hypotheticals. No offense at all intended.


I hope this rather long winded, though on point description from my POV helps further the debate.

[Boetie]

The real intention on the creation of this country was to be a peoples country. The spirit of the country was to run it without a political party.

But it was the well to do that turned the cart over by realizing that if one creates a party that organization can take over and the people can go to hell. One such party was the Federalist Party.

It turned out the Federalist party went to hell instead. Todays' Republican Party is the Federalist Party brought back to life. Sad to say today's Americans do not have the spirit of freedom the American people did back then, because if the American people today had the same spirit the Republican Party would end up going to hell the same as the Federalist Party did. The voice of the people back then spoke and said "government was not designed to be our nanny. We are the boss, government is our servant."

It is sad that the American people today tossed away the whole meaning of the American Revolution. They did this when they elected Bush Jr.

[Osborn F Enready]

Boetie, your blindness to the damages done by socialist systems of welfare and taxation, are equally as guilty as the extreme federalists and their goal of corporatism.

What good is throwing stones, when answers are READILY available?>

[Boetie]

Osborn posts: Boetie, your blindness to the damages done by socialist systems of welfare and taxation, are equally as guilty as the extreme federalists and their goal of corporatism

Where do you get all that from my post above?

Corporation wasn't even a household word back when the Federalist Party existed. And socialism didn't even exist when the Federalist Party took control of America.

In fact one of Tom Paine's last letters written only 15 years after the American Revolution predicted the collapse of the reason of the American Revolution. And the reason for that collapse was the rise of political parties.

[Osborn F Enready]

Boetie said:
Where do you get all that from my post above?

I say:
Guilty, I didn't. I took some of that opinion from reading other posts of yours. Perhaps I have errored in my judgement, and if so, I apologize.

Boetie said:
Corporation wasn't even a household word back when the Federalist Party existed. And socialism didn't even exist when the Federalist Party took control of America.

I say:
Not true. The East India Company was the Worlds First Multinational Corporation, and it was well in action by the time we in America formed and became a society with our own system of government.
I will say that it was not a common knowledge of the evils of corrupt corporatism, but though uncommon, the knowledge was out there.

Boetie said:
In fact one of Tom Paine's last letters written only 15 years after the American Revolution predicted the collapse of the reason of the American Revolution. And the reason for that collapse was the rise of political parties.

I say:
I would agree to that being a part of the reason, but not the whole reason. If parties would have been limited at that time to equal funds, provided by a limited, and legitimate tax overseen by an independent, private non-profit organization with citizen oversight, along with an amendment outlining the right to vote, the definition of a fair debate, and specifying low entrance requirements so all parties with any public support could get equal coverage in media, and the ABILITY to debate. At the time though, there was another way of thought moving through the system. It was the socialist line of thought, and it had gained party clout, and many feared the party getting any recognition. Still today that party exists, and still today because of that fear, all third parties are marginalized by the media, at the behest of the major parties and the laws they have emplaced. All of this without a peep from the people.

We all need to stand the hell up, and stop trying to be civil about the takeover of our system that has cost tons of American lives in countless illegitimate wars, and wealth redistribution schemes.

Your rights stop with your will to defend and exercise them.

[Osborn F Enready]

As I always say, the proof is in the pudding.

Congress Attempts to Kill the "Third-Party Threat"

Proposed Legislation Creates Treasury-Funded Campaigns for the Two
Major Parties, Leaving Third Parties with No Means to Run

(Washington, D.C.) On February 1, congressional Democrats, led by Rep.
Obey of Wisconsin, introduced a bill, H.R. 4694, that would end viable,
third-party competition in races for the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill, ironically named the "Let the People Decide Clean Campaign
Act," would mandate public funds (taken from the U.S. Treasury) to candidates
for the House of Representatives and forbid candidates from taking private
funds such as contributions from individual donors.

The ambiguously-written bill provides funds for candidates of the "two major parties" but essentially scuttles any campaign efforts of third-party or independent candidates.

For third-party candidates to be eligible for the same funds that
Republicans and Democrats would receive, they would have to obtain enough
signatures to exceed 20% of votes cast in the last election within their district.

The catch under the proposed legislation is that third-party or independent candidates cannot pay petitioners to collect any signatures, making it impossible to fund their campaigns.

H.R. 4694 is yet another attempt by our politicians in office to shut
down Libertarian Party candidates and other competitive third-party and
independent campaigns.

"The Republican and Democratic parties exist to maintain power for
their own benefit. The Libertarian Party exists to grasp power for the benefit
of the nation," stated Shane Cory, chief of staff for the Libertarian Party.
"American voters are waking up to this reality, and as they do, the
two parties are trying everything within their power to shut us down."


If you still deny the bi-partisan conspiracy, please see the nearest mental ward for a nice white jacket.

[pubmanager]

To my mind the electoral system in the US, much like the UK, creates this problem for itself. The nature of the adversarial, 'winner-takes-all' approach to politics is detrimental to the democratic process. The idea that power is to be won is IMO a fundamental misunderstanding of what it is to participate in a representative democracy. The foundation of any representative system is just that: representation, the notion that the primary duty of any elected official is to advocate for their constituents (not for their party). This also entails taking into account the veiws of those who did not vote for you as, once elected, you now have an obligation to represent them aswell.

The idea that there is a winner and a loser in politics is a fallacy that only serves to encourage the two-party dominitation of the political landscape. The only loser in the two-party dominated politics of the US and UK is the electorate in it's loss of real choice and its' loss of voice.

I still hold that the way in which the party system conspires to produce a two-party monopoly is analogous to the way in which the unrestricted market conspires to produce monopolies of its own.

[Osborn F Enready]

Pubmanager said: I still hold that the way in which the party system conspires to produce a two-party monopoly is analogous to the way in which the unrestricted market conspires to produce monopolies of its own.

I say:
I would agree, but only if the market is un-restricted while many of the people who make it up are ALSO restricted.

You can't have a truly free market unless you have a world of truly-free people.

Hence the war goes on between socialism, and capitalism. Neither side will let the other side get a good start, or allow un-interrupted because they can't co-exist without exclusion under their own rules.