Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Some Education On Democracy/Federalist Republics  
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1028 times:

I have gotten so tired of hearing "the will of the people" as the basis for taking votes to limit the rights and liberties of American citizens (I assume this also applies to other Democratic countries).

I have cut and pasted a response I made in another thread that I think will likely not get read by the majority of readers. It provides a link that helps outline my argument. I suggest that anyone interested in actual freedom do some further research on the topic as well.

Quoting Matt D (Reply 23):
If we start passing laws based on what the MINORITY wants, as opposed to the MAJORITY, then it becomes a dictatorship.



No. No no no no no. You are confused about the basic fundamentals of a republic and the teachings of our founding fathers, and I've tried to correct you on this a million times yet you've never really responded nor engaged in any rational defense of your position.

Majority rules sucks. Its not the foundation upon which a free state exists. Democracy, and a republic-style government, are functional only when they protect the rights and needs of the minority DESPITE the will of the majority. As I've said a billion times, and others here have too, basic civil rights were UNPOPULAR legislation. But it was the RIGHT THING TO DO.

Surely you can't defend the position that the abolition of slavery (massively unpopular), the desegregation of schools (massively unpopular) , women's suffrage (massively unpopular), and so on were failures of our democratic system. If you can, I'm all ears.

Our Constitution is SPECIFICALLY WORDED to limit the ability of the American people to vote on something that would infringe on an individual right. Our powers of election here in the US are meant to name individuals to office.


Here's some reading for you to do about the responsibility of the American state to NOT succumb to majority rule as intended by the Constitution and the founding fathers, as well as the inherent limits set in said document on the ability of someone like you to take rights away from someone like me:

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7842/otj70.htm


It points out pretty clearly the views of Thomas Jefferson and the people who established the country, but then also points out the ways that the system fails and the folly of modern goverment to protect individual liberties. I found it pretty interesting.

N

[Edited 2005-06-20 18:33:15]

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDvk From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1058 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1006 times:

It's too bad that those who most need to read this won't. Too many conservatives have fixed beliefs (i.e., misconceptions) about our government that just won't die in the face of knowledge.


I'm not dumb. I just have a command of thoroughly useless information.
User currently offlineSQuared From Canada, joined May 2005, 387 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 991 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Thread starter):
Our Constitution is SPECIFICALLY WORDED to limit the ability of the American people to vote on something that would infringe on an individual right. Our powers of election here in the US are meant to name individuals to office.


 yes 

Quite simply, all modern representative democracies make provisions that limit the "Tyranny of the Majority", so that the rights of minorities are not trampled upon. It's not an extremely profound concept, anyone who has even remotely studied Poli Sci should know this.  Yeah sure

SQuared


User currently offlinePendrilsaint From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 685 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 975 times:

Yeah, I suggest everyone sit down and read the Anti Federalists Papers and the Federalist papers as well. The Federalist papers upset me a lot...I think the Anti-Federalists are infinitely more wise and well-reasoned...oh well...we know who won.

User currently offlineSlider From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 6816 posts, RR: 34
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 969 times:

Pendrilsaint-

The book "Founding Brothers" by Joseph Ellis is excellent and it delves into that Federalist/Anti-Federalist thing a bit more in one of the excerpted chronicles.

Really an outstanding book. It's profound to me how wise the Founders were in so many regards, as if they did have a crystal ball to see the eternal battle between a powerful Federal govt VS states and individual rights.

********************************

On topic of individual liberties, I would say that we are governed more by regulation and unelected people as well as our own elected people who trample the Constitution daily moreso than by the voters themselves who may violate the "minority right, majority rule" notion. In fact, I would say the latter is a red herring compared to the former in terms of scale, depth and magnitude.


User currently offline1MillionFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 967 times:

This is a prime example of why we need to improve education in the United States. probably 80% of the US population could not explain the Constitution if pressed.

We are becoming a nation of severely obese, gluttonous, self-righteous self-centered idiots.


User currently offlineCsavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1363 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 931 times:

Gigneil,
Your post should be required reading before posting anything in this forum.

Quoting 1MillionFlyer (Reply 5):
We are becoming a nation of severely obese, gluttonous, self-righteous self-centered idiots.

A damned shame, and tough to take but true, we want to sit our fat asses in our SUV and go from one store to another to shove more and more crap in our hypertrophied McMansions.

ANd when gas hits a high and we have to OMFG *sacrifice* we turn into a nation of whiners.

It's gonna be a rude awakening when the shit hits the fan.



I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3377 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 921 times:

.

Quoting Gigneil (Thread starter):
As I've said a billion times, and others here have too, basic civil rights were UNPOPULAR legislation. But it was the RIGHT THING TO DO.

Surely you can't defend the position that the abolition of slavery (massively unpopular), the desegregation of schools (massively unpopular) , women's suffrage (massively unpopular), and so on were failures of our democratic system. If you can, I'm all ears.

Our Constitution is SPECIFICALLY WORDED to limit the ability of the American people to vote on something that would infringe on an individual right. Our powers of election here in the US are meant to name individuals to office.

You are 100% correct here.
I was gonna bring this up but you beat me to it Gigneil and you are 100% correct. For all the people against Gay Marrage think back to the 1860's and the 1960's then the slaves were freed. AS you said in 1863 do you think that majority of white people wanted to make black people free from slavery, however Lincoln had the balls to do the right thing. Now fast foward to the 1960's and its the same thing. So 40 years later what is the big argument about giving gays the right to marriage, who does this really affect except the churches which have their right to marry whoever they want anyway. How is Gay Marriage going to collapse US ot any society serioulsly. What I think needs to happen is that the gay community needs a leader willing to fight for this right like Martin Luther King Jr. did for black rights.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 906 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Thread starter):
I have gotten so tired of hearing "the will of the people" as the basis for taking votes to limit the rights and liberties of American citizens (I assume this also applies to other Democratic countries).

The implication of your post to civil rights is very true, although its applicability specifically to gay marriage at the federal level is arguable (under the 10th Amendment, for example).

However, the American left seems perfectly willing to infringe on the economic freedom of small groups of people if these policies are widely popular or fulfill some arbitrary notion of "fairness." As Nobel Prize winner F. A. Hayek put it:

"We must face the fact that the preservation of individual freedom is incompatible with a full satisfaction of our views of distributive justice.... Even the striving for equality by means of a directed economy can result only in an officially enforced inequality -- an authoritarian determination of the status of each individual in the new hierarchical order." (Individualism and the Economic Order and The Road to Serfdom).

Progressive taxation, wealth redistribution schemes, and many other traditionally liberal social programs essentially exploit a minority to benefit the majority. The fact that this minority is "the rich" makes politically palatable what would otherwise be unthinkable (replace "the rich" with "blacks," "Jews," "left-handed people," etc.).

The encroachment of federal authority into areas never conceived by the Framers should also be a concern for liberals, but like the conservatives have shown in the past several years, they have no problem accepting big and intrusive government as long as it suits their political ends.

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26497 posts, RR: 75
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 897 times:

Quoting Pendrilsaint (Reply 3):
Yeah, I suggest everyone sit down and read the Anti Federalists Papers and the Federalist papers as well. The Federalist papers upset me a lot...I think the Anti-Federalists are infinitely more wise and well-reasoned...oh well...we know who won.

Actually, if you read the Federalist Papers more closely, particularly 51, you can see that the wording Madison used can easily be read to mean say all Neil said and more

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 8):
The implication of your post to civil rights is very true, although its applicability specifically to gay marriage at the federal level is arguable (under the 10th Amendment, for example).

The 10th Amendment was largely invalidated by the 14th.

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 8):
However, the American left seems perfectly willing to infringe on the economic freedom of small groups of people if these policies are widely popular or fulfill some arbitrary notion of "fairness."

Abolition of slavery was seen by many as in infringement on the economic freedom of a rather large group, yet it was absolutely the right thing. Your "infringement" here is done to protect the life, liberty and property of the working class and poor and end economic slavery to the rich

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 8):
The encroachment of federal authority into areas never conceived by the Framers should also be a concern for liberals, but like the conservatives have shown in the past several years, they have no problem accepting big and intrusive government as long as it suits their political ends.

Again, not only has technological advancement as well as land/population size of the US brought about the need for greater central control, but the Constitution was actually changed nearly 140 years ago to cut down a lot of the state power in the 10th Amendment



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Can Anyone Shed Some Light On This Vid? posted Sat Sep 30 2006 22:24:44 by AA61Hvy
Need Some Info On Holiday To Tanzania... posted Thu Aug 10 2006 09:32:02 by Uadc8contrail
I Need Some Help On Spain! posted Mon Mar 13 2006 05:27:25 by COEWR777
Need Some Info On India Please posted Wed Nov 9 2005 07:07:37 by Springbok747
Need Some Feedback On Tube Vs. Solid State Amps posted Wed Jun 15 2005 04:13:22 by Bio15
Need Some Info On Some Univ. posted Mon Mar 7 2005 21:18:38 by AA61Hvy
Seeking Some Opinions On Quality Automobiles posted Thu Jul 8 2004 06:37:55 by KBUF737
Help: Need Some Info On Daycare posted Mon Feb 23 2004 01:59:19 by Aa61hvy
Why Cant Some People On A.net Take A Joke? posted Thu Jan 15 2004 03:26:09 by Usairwys757
Some Thoughts On Bush And Terror... posted Mon Nov 24 2003 19:15:14 by Sabena 690