Tuesday, December 13, 2005
-B
If you do not agree with your government, my suggestion is to write them or call them.
Posted by: -B at December 12, 2005 12:35 PM
HA! You wish it were that simple.
Posted by: -A. at December 12, 2005 12:36 PM
I thought about this today. I should have said that it *might* work if *everyone* with governmental grievances called or wrote. So upon reflection, I somewhat agree with what you wrote…And me, feeling small and powerless against the government is what seems to be what made me decide to write that snarky comment. Because even when a lot of us call and/or write about an issue, it still feels like the government does exactly what It wants to. This may be why some people do not participate in a process that so often seems hopeless.
*
Posted by: -B at December 12, 2005 12:33 PM
I don't read slowly here unless something very much interests me.
*
I'm not a Democrat or a Republican.
I think if a person labels themselves as one or the other party, then they’re already divided, and it's obvious we've been conquered. To me this seems like exactly the way they (the government) wants the people to be - DIVIDED, on every issue.
My personal belief is that the two parties are actually an illusion, and both are controlled by One group or groups of people. I'm not sure who, but my guess is it's the wealthiest of us all who do that.
Whoever they are that manipulate and control All, they know that it's easier to control half, (less than half), of the participating followers of each party...Republicans are merely more effective at this because they're more wealthy and more cohesive. I believe they're more cohesive because they're more religion based and it's easier to control and manipulate people via their faith because they're already natural followers. Democrats *seem* to be freer thinkers, but I think that's also part of the intended illusion of that party, Democrats are more difficult to unite. They're generally younger and less wealthy than people who follow the Republican party.
It's NOT easy, if not impossible to manipulate and control an entire, united population. Which is why I advocate breaking out of labels and parties and coming together as humans. Near impossible, as most people don't focus on same-nesses, just differences, and mostly operate from a place of fear.
Also, I don't believe my votes count. I don't trust the process as it exists.
*
George Washington also warns of the potential dangers stemming from two parties in his "Farewell Address" September 17, 1796:
"All obstructions to the execution of the Laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, controul, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. - They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force - to put in the place of the delegated will of the Nation, the will of a party; often a small but artful and enterprizing minority of the community; - and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration a mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common councils, and modified by mutual interests.-However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the Power of the People and to usurp for themselves the reigns if Government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
I have already intimated to you the danger of Parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on Geographical discriminations.-Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the Spirit of Party, generally.
This Spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. -It exists under different shapes in all Governments, more or less stifled, controuled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissention, which in different ages and countries has perpetuated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.-But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an Individual: and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty.
...It agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionaly riots and insurrection.-It opens the doors to foreign influence and corruption, which find a facilitated access to the Government itself through channels of the party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country, are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the Administration of the Government, and serve to keep alive the Spirit of Liberty. This within certain limits is probably true-and in Governments of Monarchical cast,
Patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favour, upon the spirit of party. -But in those of the popular character, in Governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. -From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose, -and there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be, by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it.-A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest instead of warming, it should consume."
*
James Bryce "American Commonwealth", 1893
"There are two great and several minor parties in the United States. The great parties are the Republicans and the Democrats. What are their principles, their directive tenets, their tendencies? Which of them is for tariff reform, for the further extension of civil service reform, for a spirited foreign policy, for the regulation of railroads and telegraphs by legislation, for changes in the currency, for any other of the twenty issues which one hears discussed in the country as seriously involving its welfare?
This is what a European is always asking intelligent Republicans and intelligent Democrats. He is always asking because he never gets an answer. The replies leave him in deeper perplexity. After some months the truth begins to dawn upon him.
Neither party has, as a party, anything definitive to say on these issues; neither party has any clean-cut principles, and distinctive tenets. Both have traditions. Both claim to have tendencies. Both have certain war cries, organizations, interests of getting and keeping the patronage of the government.
....Parties go on contending because their members have formed habits of joint action, and have contracted hatreds and prejudices, and also because their leaders find their advantage in using these habits and playing on these prejudices. The American parties now continue to exist, because they have existed. The mill has been constructed, and its machinery goes on turning, even when there is no grist to grind. ........the conservative section of the Democrats, differ very little from the conservative Republicans, and there are radical Republicans whose views are shared by plenty of Democrats. This approximation seems to indicate that the time for a reconstruction of parties is approaching; but party organizations are strong things, and often interfere with natural evolution.
...An eminent journalist remarked to me in 1908 that the two parties were like two bottles. Each bore a label denoting the kind of liquor it contained, but each was empty.
*
Needless to say you can refer to the case for anarchism, in "Anarchism and Other Essays" by Emma Goldman written in 1910
"The goal of Anarchism is the freest possible expression of all the latent powers of the individual."
.........Just as religion has fettered the human mind, and as property or the monopoly of things has subdued and stifled man's needs, so has the State enslaved his spirit, dictating every phase of conduct. "All government in essence,” says Emerson, "is tyranny." It matters not whether it is government by divine right or majority rule. In every instance its aim is the absolute subordination of the individual..."
*
Direct Action, in it's time of usage, generally meant using violence...however, Voltairine de Cleyre points to the Underground Railroad as an example of non-violent Direct Action. Not paying taxes is another. Voltairine explains that ALL the different Anarchists can be united by the idea of human freedom. I add that all people can be united by the idea of human freedom as well. These two parties and their cronyism and traditions have done nothing to unite America or the citizens of America, let alone the rest of our world and people. Creating strife over imaginary borders, what useless folly, and yet another way to divide and conquer the populations. Does one really need the government to take over the job of protecting and caring for people? Does one really need the government to make them wealthy? The government certainly has no concern with making anyone more intelligent, because that would be contrary to the purpose of controlling the population. A population which is right now under attack by the Government....(as was discussed last night on the blog), and killing us by any means necessary to leave what's left of the planet to the Ones who control it….and a plan that has the full consent of all the elected government, judging by their silence on speaking out against their own parties…they go along with anything in order to keep their positions of perceived power.
Revolutions take place when thoughts turn in to actions. I had hoped that action would have begun September 24th. Cindy Sheehan and numerous others have caused action, however not enough of the population has decided that their daily lives are worth putting aside for freedom from government.
It takes more than 1/2 of 1/2 of the US population to create a change. As long as there are people who are too poor to notice what the government is doing, because survival is their concern, too rich and comfortable to care what the government does, too ignorant to understand what government is doing...and as long as there are two parties, splitting what remains of people who even participate in the farce called government, a revolution by the people of the U.S. population is not possible. A phone call, email or letter by 1/2 of 1/2 of the people, to 1/2 of the two party system, is not going to change this beast into a beauty, imo.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
