Thoughts on the US

[Pathfinder]

In posting to the thread on impeachment possibilities, I started to firm up some ideas that have been bouncing around my skull. Here’s what I have so far.

In ancient times, the Greeks had a myth about the first woman on earth, Pandora. Zeus gave Pandora a beautiful container – with instructions not to open it under any circumstance. Pandora of course opened it, and the evil contained in the box escaped and spread over the earth. She tried to close the container, but everything had escaped except the Spirit of Hope.

About the same time as the early Greek culture flourished, Rome started out as a small village, and eventually morphed into a kingship. In 509BC, the king was overthrown, replaced by the republican form of government in which 2 consuls served for 1 year. Rome retained an almost regal structure, with the consuls on top (for a year), the senate below that, the equestrians (knights) class below that, and then the plebians – literally, common people.

The only difference between the republic and the later empire was that the consuls were typically changed each year. Yes, from the senatorial class, but still different people. This form of government lasted, in spite of attempts by Marius and Sulla to become despots, for nearly 500 years. At that point, Julius Caesar did become a despot, and after his assassination, the mantle of despot was assumed by his adopted son/nephew, Octavian, who became Caesar Augustus.

One of the reasons why Julius Caesar was assassinated was that his assassins tried to bring back the Republic, lead by such notables as Cicero and Cato. For decades after, various people, including allegedly the Emperor Claudius, thought about bringing the Republic back, but no one could figure out a way to do so – assuming the stories/writings are right, and the interest in the Republic genuine rather than a sop to some of the dissidents.

OK, so why the history lesson? As George Santayana said, those who forget history are condemned to repeat it (or something like that).

In our case, we weren’t so much forgetful as the educational “system” never offered history in a meaningful way to the masses. And as a result, most in this country are being lead down the primrose path to a form of oligarchy, where leaders are selected from a very restricted subset of candidates. Along with that are the clear signs of tyranny that have occurred in these United States for 30-40 years – at least, wherein .gov uber alles.

Not to mention the destruction of this country in cultural, economic, political and military terms.

As with the early Roman emperors, I am not sure that we can close the Pandora’s box that has been opened. I have mentioned in other threads that the constitutional republic that was formed ca. 225 years ago is dead. I even asked for opinions on what America 2.0 should look like to address and restrict future abuses such as those that a variety of people have wrought using our laws to pervert this country into a “democracy”, but got nothing back.

My fear is that the constitutional republic can never be brought back, as Pandora could not retrieve the evil she loosed. That saddens me deeply. And the fact it happened on our watch, right under our noses, indicates the deviousness and power wielded by those who will profit by our destruction. And that pisses me off.

So, what to do?

[tombogan03884]

Go back to the original limited vote.
The British system imposed a "property requirement" to qualify as a voter.
At the end of the Revolution most, if not all, states not only reinstated that, they doubled the limit from L50 to L100 .
This put the vote firmly in the hands of those who actually created the jobs and the wealth they generated .

A modern version of this would be an income sufficient to live on and pay taxes on.
In other words a stake in the country's well being .
This removes the incentives to piss public money away on bread and circuses for "the poor", and would end the debate on illegal immigration as there would be no benefit gained from "undocumented Democrats".

[fightingquaker13]

Arisdtotle would agree. His "best" or least bad form of government was a timocracy where only stake holders in the city were allowed to vote.

[tombogan03884]

Arisdtotle would agree. His "best" or least bad form of government was a timocracy where only stake holders in the city were allowed to vote.

It's a concept that built 3 empires, Roman, British, and American.
Leaving that philosophy lead to the fall of all 3.

[MLC]

While I wholeheartedly agree with the concept, how do you get a voter to disenfranchise themselves?  How could you convince any elected official to pass such a law?  It's too easy for them to offer bread and circuses to the ignorati and get reelected.

[Sponsor]

[fatbaldguy]

While I wholeheartedly agree with the concept, how do you get a voter to disenfranchise themselves?  How could you convince any elected official to pass such a law?  It's too easy for them to offer bread and circuses to the ignorati and get reelected.

Revolution.

[Solus]

So, let us call that the newest "Amendment" to the new Constitution.

I'd say most of the existing ones should carry over, but how about making a list.   I'd guess we might "reword" some of the existing ones to nail down a clearer meaning.

For instance the 2A perhaps might include wording specifying the types of weapons included.  It might be any weapon issued to individual military personnel, or it might be "anything you can afford".

[fightingquaker13]

While I wholeheartedly agree with the concept, how do you get a voter to disenfranchise themselves?  How could you convince any elected official to pass such a law?  It's too easy for them to offer bread and circuses to the ignorati and get reelected.

We might MIGHT, be able to pass a law that said no one on the dole got to vote (excluding SS of course). It would be seen as racist, blah blah and Al Sharpton woud have kittens, so people would be afraid to say they supported it. But in a secret ballot as an iniative? I'd bet it would pass.

[crusader rabbit]

While I agree with Tom that we should institute a land holder requirement before allowing an individual to vote, I also believe that nothing short of revolution will ever see this come to pass.

I also believe this is the first time in the history of mankind that a majority of citizens have come to depend upon the largess of the shrinking minority who are willing and able to work.  That we now say that the non-working class deserves the same standard of living as those who actually produce suggests to me that we are way too far down the rabbit hole to make meaningful change through the democratic process.

Unfortunately, a revolution has the very real potential for going the wrong way for constitutionalists.  Look at what happened in the South African countries--especially Rwanda.  Land owners were eliminated with only the lucky ones leaving with their heads.

I think the best we could legitimately hope for is the dissolution of the current union and the establishment of two or more "new" unions.  But, I don't think it could be accomplished through peaceful means.

I can envision four distinct sections of our formerly great nation:  1) the Liberal Northeast; 2: the Conservative Southeast; 3) The Liberal West;  the Conservative Mid-South West.  Which specific former states would comprise each area would have to be fought out, but I see alliances between the southern and mid-southwest factions and similar alliances between the west and northeast.  Roughly, I see the NE including most if not all of New England, New York/Jersey, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and down as low as southern Ohio.  The SE would include everything from the Carolinas down to Florida and as far west as Alabama.  The Mid-SW capital will be Texas, with Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Arizona and perhaps New Mexico as part on the union.  The west will be California, Oregon, Washington, Colorado and possibly a few others.  Idaho, Wyoming and similar states would ally themselves with one of the conservative factions, while the remaining liberal states would find a happy home in alliance with the NE or West.

The good part of this is, in my opinion, that the conservative factions will include most agrarian areas that will continue to grow crops, so we will have a continuing supply of food.  The next good part now seems to be that the liberal states are now forcing weapons manufacturers into the conservative areas, so we may also have a continuing supply of weapons.

The bad part of this is that the northeast will have limited food supplies and there is very little more dangerous than a cornered enemy with nothing to lose.  We will need to forge agreements allowing for reasonable commerce between the areas, and we will need to develop a currency based upon something real like gold or silver.

Could all this take place?  Not only could it, I think there is a strong likelihood that it will. But, at 65 I fear I will not be around to witness the benefits of such a revolution.  And my scenario does not take into consideration the Chinese who may very well recognize our current failures and weaknesses and take over the nation entirely instead of simply benignly owning most of it.  Who knows?  We may all soon be learning Mandarin.

FWIW
Crusader Rabbit

[JC5123]

I've said for a long time that if you should only be allowed to vote if you have a tax obligation. This would accomplish 2 very important things. #1 it would eliminate the leeches from voting. #2 it would force the .gov to enact better fiscal policy based on the fact that they are courting the vote from PRODUCERS and not the gimme crowd.