I originally posted the following in another community in response who believes that American Democracy merely exists on paper. I really like what came out of me in this post, and I have decided to post it here
( Read more... )
I do hope there will always be a passionate backlash against the casual assertion that the Citizen's United decision was some sort of giveaway to plutocrats. I challenge all who say so to tell me if they really believe it should be illegal to produce and advertise a documentary film critical of Hillary Clinton. For, if you believe it should be legal to place on film a narrative critical of her, and also legal to attract an audience for said film, than it follows that you ought to favor a legal decision that comes to that conclusion.
I for one am thankful that SCOTUS affirmed our right to make movies our politicians find offensive. I wish they had done so for that Coptic fellow a few years back, as well. Secretary Clinton still needs to be held accountable for that, and of course threatening ABC's broadcasting license of 'The Path To 9/11/'
Making movies is just fine -- make all the movies you want. But the Supreme Court ruling went well beyond making movies. In the process of freeing movie makers, they gave those who can afford to give millions of dollars to buy candidates. Moreover, nobody has to know who the donors are, so you will never know what your candidates' real agenda is. Democracy is therefore defeated, because people never know exactly what they are voting for. It was not necessary for the Supreme Court to go that far, just to allow movies that criticize candidates.
And fight we must. Things have really gotten out of the hands of the people. But it takes more than one dictator to end democracy. It takes the people to be frightened into a frenzy, and then having the potential dictator manage to channel that fear into power for himself. As I have said before, the problem in this country is not Donald Trump, but that for the past few decades, continuous programming has been done to the people of America. "Government is bad", "Obama is a bad Muslim", "non-whites are taking over your country". In the meantime, the politicians allies in business help to stir up the fear by doing things like refusing to pay taxes, refusing to pay wages that people can live on, sending their profits overseas, sending jobs overseas -- all genuine reasons for fear, but none of which can be solved by the solutions offered by people like Trump
( ... )
You do realize that we don't live in a democracy, right? We live in a constitutional republic. Democracies are not nice places to live and always turn into some sort of oligarchy.
As for LBJ's 'great society' that wasn't democracy, that was socialism, and it has caused more problems than it has solved. Johnson also opposed the civil rights movement, he was not a champion of it.
As for citizen's united, well free speech is free speech. If you're going to say corporations or other organizations can't have it, then you should be shutting down the 401c's like Moveon, etc.
As for the rich, well, of course they have more power than the poor, that's why they are rich. Money doesn't give you power, power gives you money. Which is why all of the left wing democrats in our government are millionaires. They have used their power to gather wealth. Look at how many millions the Clintons and Obama have made while in office.
As far as whether our country is a republic or a democracy, different political climates have determined what people think in this regard. This article states among other things that an appropriate term for our country is Democratic Republic. It is interesting that in our constitution, it is "we the PEOPLE" who establish and ordain, and not "we the states", or "we the representatives of the people." As the article notes, the Constitution never uses the word democracy, and it only uses the word republic in it's insistence that each of the states have a republican government. I have observed that in our time, the only people who insist on the use of the term Republic are those who want to cheat the people whom they see as having less power or social status than they do. In your statements about the rich, it appears that you are among these "elite" who think that only their vote should count.
As far as Johnson is concerned, he was opposed to Civil Rights in his early years as an elected official, but according to this article shows
( ... )
Not my fault if you misread what I wrote about the rich and power. In all systems the people with power use it and attract wealth, it's human nature. In our system we just make it easier for anyone to be able to attract that power and wealth, instead of locking them into classes
( ... )
Comments 7
I for one am thankful that SCOTUS affirmed our right to make movies our politicians find offensive. I wish they had done so for that Coptic fellow a few years back, as well. Secretary Clinton still needs to be held accountable for that, and of course threatening ABC's broadcasting license of 'The Path To 9/11/'
Reply
Reply
However, the U.S. is technically a democratic republic.
Reply
Reply
As for LBJ's 'great society' that wasn't democracy, that was socialism, and it has caused more problems than it has solved. Johnson also opposed the civil rights movement, he was not a champion of it.
As for citizen's united, well free speech is free speech. If you're going to say corporations or other organizations can't have it, then you should be shutting down the 401c's like Moveon, etc.
As for the rich, well, of course they have more power than the poor, that's why they are rich. Money doesn't give you power, power gives you money. Which is why all of the left wing democrats in our government are millionaires. They have used their power to gather wealth. Look at how many millions the Clintons and Obama have made while in office.
Reply
As far as Johnson is concerned, he was opposed to Civil Rights in his early years as an elected official, but according to this article shows ( ... )
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment