Skip to comments.Is the United States Broken?
Posted on 04/04/2002 10:13:48 AM PST by B. A. Conservative
There have been 26 people who responded to the initial post in this series entitled, "Not Goint to Take It Anymore". I have tried to infer their thinking regarding the underlying premise of the series: the United States as defined under our Constitution has ceased to exist. There are at least two separate population groups living within the geographical confines of the United States. The two groups have diametrically opposing views of government. There is some over-lapping of the geographic areas occupied by the two groups, but surprisingly the over-lap is less than most imagine. This makes a geo-political division between the groups feasible and perhaps desireable.
Of the 26 replies, there was only one who felt that the idea that the United States is broken was treachery or treasonous. There were four who plan to monitor these threads and who seemed undecided. Most respondents agree that the United States is in fact broken.
I am posting the first question now as its own thread to provide additional opportunities to recruit additional Freepers to participate in the discussion and for each participant to have a venue to clearly state their own opinions.
Is the United States broken?
Please don't be bashful and please recruit your Freeping buddies to participate. I am suggesting that this site exists because almost all of us have realized the truth, even though most of us have been unwilling to admit it to others and in particularly, many of us have been unwilling to admit the truth to ourselves. Recognition of an unpleasant truth make it incumbent upon us to deal with it or accept it. For some, this could amount to a revelation to ourselves that we really don't love freedom as much as we would pretend and are thus not the patriots we thought ourselves to be. For others, this could be a vital reawakening and a call to respond.
When this series is finished, I hope we all know in our own minds where we stand. From that knowledge, we may be able to synthesize a reasonable and rational plan to recover what we have lost.
Where do we begin? I think it might be more accurate to answer
"No, but the government of the US is....."
Then again, if the vast majority of everyone here, wants a
socialist EU clone, perhaps the answer truly is "Yes"
As far as the discussion on the Constitution goes, I'll be happy to participate as I can, and hope I can contribute something worthwhile.
One thing I do think seems to be a problem is the term "regulate". It's commonly understood meaning in the 18th century has been lost, and replacing it with the more modern definition within the context of the Constitution has resulted in serious misunderstanding of what the responsibilities and authority of the federal government are - IMHO.
A war was fought.
The Constitution was not created to deal with the political realities of the Industrial Age. After anti-trust laws broke the back of the Rugged Individual, 'Progressives' launched a host of national crusades (woman's sufferage, alcohol, cocaine, and opium prohibition...) unthinkable in rational government. Workers exploited the capitalists with the sit-down strike and extorted demands from the capitalists.
War was now exported to build the empire (Spanish-American, The Boxer Rebellion, World War One, Philippines Insurrection...)
We are still living with a failed Industrial Era government. Factories are now closing (as who wants the headaches?) in favor of mobile information business.
The Constitution was based on regional conflicts to promote a balance of power, however, with increased freedom of movement, the lines are drawn around cities and rural communities eager to receive fleeing urban capitalists.
A new Information Elite cares not for nationalism but, in this age, still has tight bonds to the land of our fathers. Much like the generation who fathered the forefathers were still attached to Mother England and would never think of 'rebelling.'
However, since the information elite can go to any port, in any country, and so long as he has his laptop and cell phone, he can conduct business and provide for his family. Thus, most of us will choose discretion as the better part of valor and opt to move rather than bleed for our farms. This is the metaphoric seach for Galt's Gulch we talked about in the last thread.
What will become of the nation-state that we knew? Well, that is why we enjoy politics. The have-nots will continue to demand more from that haves and arcane references to Constitutional interpretations will not stop what amounts to a 73%-93% tax on the amount of wealth we earn in a lifetime (compound interest on $5000 paid each tax year is ~$1.5 million in lifetime earnings- thus the opportunity cost must be considered.)
Alas but the 17th Amendment overturned that and we have what we have now. A group of men that appeal to the masses and whoever has the most money in their pockets
This may be considered simplistic, but in my view, the most significant factor is the ignorance of the Declaration of Independence and its reference to the Creator, as the grantor of rights.
The government is currently the grantor of rights, and rights are granted in a "right du jour" sort of way. This has allowed the origination of "rights", that aren't consistent with any objective moral standard.
Quite often, the only basis for morality, is political expedience, rather than a prescribed objective moral code. In this light, abortion "rights" [for ex.] are manufactured according to the best rationalization we can muster, regardless of how devoid of reason, since the attainment of the right is the [political] objective, and not the preservation or attainment of an objective moral state of affairs.
Now back to reality and our regularly scheduled programming.
Thats the funniest pic I seen in a long time.
Thats the funniest pic I've seen in a long time.
sorry for my poor typing
This expropriation is inevitable without property qualifications for voting, which is why the founding generation did so restrict the suffrage. Poll taxes were usefull for this also. To return to workable politics is impossible without crisis. Machievelli and Plato said that Democracy always fails after expropriating the rich. A tyrant is voted in to accomplish this, as was Hitler.
a) the Biblical morality is was built on is gone
b) the people have become so dumbed down that they're clueless
A massive factory in the late 19th Century and well into the 1930s was a huge capital investment. Since the investment could not be moved, there was 'tyranny of place' that is not accounted for in libertarian thought of Calhoun's time. However, the Information Age will solve that.