The idea is based on a basic truth, stated perhaps most eloquently by Thomas Jefferson, who noted that:
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society, but the people themselves: and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power." -- Thomas Jefferson
Adding to that, Jefferson noted: “Those seeking profits, were they given total freedom, would not be the ones to trust to keep government pure and our rights secure. Indeed, it has always been those seeking wealth who were the source of corruption in government..."
That is so true. But in America those seeking wealth have gained power, while during the same time everyone else has become worse off financially and the quality and quantity of their education has decreased substantially.
This is a huge problem, and it was created not by accident, but by design. It was according to a plan conceived in the 1950s by right-wing extremists who wanted to destroy progressive President Roosevelt's New Deal. They didn't succeed immediately and their plan was squelched for a while in the 1960s. But it came back in the 1970s and gained tremendous momentum in the 1980s. By 2000 it was in full gear, and little or nothing has been done to stop it. That's why we, the people, need to fix the problem, because politicians won't -- not unless and until the vast majority of the people demand real, comprehensive reform.
So, the idea as stated in The 21st Century Declaration of Independence is that government should exist not merely by the consent of the governed, but also by our own free choice and equal opportunity to determine who represents us at the highest levels of government, and by preventing money from influencing government and the political process.
As it is, money rules and we the people do not have free choice and equal opportunity to choose who represents us. We are presented with choices by wealthy political power brokers.Even worse, the basic choices we have are limited to candidates from organized partisan political parties that divide us. We have no choice but to take sides, be pitted against each other, and buy into the polarizing battle for the throne. And, regardless of which partisan warrior wins the battle for the throne, the wealthiest few win and the vast majority loses.
The result of this divisive partisan political game is a divided nation and a divided government -- a government that doesn’t even have the consent of half the people it governs. So it is certainly not government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Instead, it has government of, by, and for the wealthiest few who act as if their wealth entitles them to rule.
We the people should not accept this as the status quo, especially since it has proven to be to our detriment.
Instead, we should make the Real American Dream come true, because it is in our power to do so.The fulfillment of the Real American Dream would be having a government that is truly of the people, by the people and for the people --- government that promotes the general welfare by using the common wealth for the common good, and ensures domestic tranquility, liberty, freedom, and justice for all the people.
America does not yet have that, because America does not yet have a real democracy. And America is not a Democratic Republic as Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and other Founders envisioned and intended.
For example, Jefferson understood that a democracy can be sustainable only if there is an informed, educated public. That's why he was not only a leading proponent of a free press and public schools, but also of public higher education so that all good students could fulfill their potential regardless of their family's wealth.
But, America has failed to live up to Jefferson's principles, which Abraham Lincoln said are "the axioms of a free society."
America has not only failed to provide publicly funded higher education at no cost out of pocket. America is now failing to provide public education K-12 that is fully publicly funded. In fact, students and parents are now forced to pay more and more out of pocket costs for school supplies. Teachers pay for a lot of things out of their own pockets. Public education itself is in serious jeopardy because the wealthy say "We cannot afford it" (which is really a ploy to fulfill the demand of wealthy and religious people to receive public funds for their private schools). And the cost of higher education keeps escalating beyond the reach of most students (unless they want to take student loans and plunge deep into debt for most of their lives).
Of course, part of the problem is that the corporate commercial news media has not been fully informing the public of things we should know, and investigative journalists have fail to keep politicians honest. And, because so many people are so uninformed, they are easily misled by wealthy special interests that have been given free license to spend all they want in television and radio ads to mislead and deceive the public, bribe politicians, sway voters, and buy elections.
It is much like it was in the 1020s, because the wealthy few have been given the power to rule, and power has corrupted them. Consequently, the U.S. Government has failed to abide by the Universal Divine Imperative or Golden Rule. Instead, it treats the wealthy few with favor, privilege and entitlement while not caring that everyone else, and especially the working poor and the poor, suffer.
One horrible consequence, according to The latest UNICEF report on child poverty, is that 23.1 percent of American children live in poverty, giving the United States the second highest rate of child poverty out of 35 developed countries. In 2010, 20.5 million Americans were living on less than half of the federal poverty level. And about 79 percent of the children in poverty live in households where there is at least one adult working full time!
It is no wonder, then, that there is a partisan political battle dividing and polarizing Americans. And we should understand clearly what it is about.
The Basic Conflict
It is basically waged by those who represent the wealthiest few, as opposed to those who represent and advocate for the average citizenry, the working poor, the elderly, the disabled, and the poor. And in that respect, it is much like the partisan political battle that was waged in the debates during the Constitutional Convention from May to September in 1787, and again in the debates from 1790 to 1800 between Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton.
It's really the same old basic argument we still have because, like Jefferson, the majority of us want our nation to be a Democratic Republic in which all the people have equal rights and equal opportunities, while our opponents believe that their wealth and/or their professed religion entitles them to rule.
The argument still rages in spite of the fact that it was settled during the Constitutional Convention in 1787, and it still rages in spite of the fact that in 1801 it became very clear that the majority the Founders and the majority of citizens agreed with Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and favored a Democratic Republic, and rejected the Hamiltonian Federalists for being too wedded to a wealthy British-style upper class elitist aristocracy.
There have been many similar battles since, and the war wages on more bitterly now than ever before because the wealthiest few Republican and Libertarian Multi-Billionaires have been enabled and empowered by all three branches of government. And now, since right-wing partisan political extremists have been and are even now attempting to invoke the names of Founding Fathers as well as invoking the name of Jesus Christ trying to justify themselves, it is time to set the record straight and reveal the truth.
The Truth That Shatters the False Beliefs and False Claims
The Founders of the United States of America intended to establish and maintain freedom, liberty and sovereign independence. Most of them wanted a Democratic Republic, and they were against hereditary royal monarchy or aristocracy, oligarchy or plutocracy based on wealth. They were particularly against religious Theocracy, ensuring that there be no religious requirement for office, and no law regarding the establishment of religion. They wanted average people to have equal opportunity, and they wanted the people to be free and able to choose leadership that they deemed wise, virtuous, and educated.
Of course, there were a minority of Founding Fathers who had a different world view and a different interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, because they preferred the British traditions of aristocracy and the British banking and economic systems that catered to and enabled the wealthiest few. So, even though the Constitution clearly rejected those traditions and established Democracy, some wealthy Americans refused to see it that way.
That is why in 1801 Jefferson's and Madison's Democratic Republican Party had to defeat the Federalists, because the Federalist Party was driven by Hamiltonians even though their presidential candidate was the more moderate John Adams. And by solidifying Jeffersonian ideals Jefferson and Madison honored the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, and took another huge step in human evolution.
However, America has been pushed backwards many times, especially especially in the 1920s and during the last 32 years because of Reaganism and Reaganomics. That is why now we must take another step forward, because Article 2 of the Constitution still maintains the European idea that there must be a chief executive head of state and commander in chief, and the U.S. model is really just a presidential form of monarchy.
That is what perpetuates the conflict and division in America, because of the battle for the throne, and that battle is now constant. And Americans need to realize that such a system cannot possibly establish government of, by the for the people -- not in a winner-take-all fight for power over each other.
Granted, the Framers of the Constitution did establish a balance of powers between the executive, judicial and legislative branches of government, and what is known as checks and balances of power. At the time that was the best they could think of to try to establish government that represented the people, with the consent of the people. But we need to progress, and advance, and evolve.
All the Founding Fathers realized that even though they believed they were doing the best thing at the time, the time might come when the people would need to alter or reform their government, if and when it no longer served their interests. And that is why they wrote Article 5 of the Constitution, to provide methods to revise and amend the Constitution as needed.
As yet, Article 5 still has not been used for its ultimate purpose, which is why partisan politics still divides us and the government still serves the interests of the wealthiest few to the detriment of everyone else. That’s why the American people’s consent is flimsy, at best.
Since this message was first published in its original form in January 2002, many people have learned or realized that the U.S. Government has not yet lived up to the actual intent of its Founding Fathers, and the American Dream has been compromised, to say the least.
In fact, the American Dream has been distorted into the idea that government should enable individuals to gain great personal fame and fortune, and simply forget about promoting the general welfare and ensuring domestic tranquility, equity and justice for all the people.
A false ideology has produced a culture of greed and self-interest, especially during the last 30 years, and it has caused many of our young people to be obsessed with material things, like fame, fortune, and superficial image. Yet, at the same time, most young people no longer trust any politician and see "the democratic process" of partisan politics as dirty, divisive, and rigged to benefit the wealthiest few regardless of which partisan political party wins.
That is why gentle, conscientious, generous, independent, progressive people of good will have always realized that rather than stoop to the level of aggressive, offensive partisans, the best way to influence people is through truthful, non-offensive, informative speech and effective art, literature, plays, documentaries, movies, and songs.
For example: “Democracy is coming to the U.S.A. It’s coming to America first, the cradle of the best and worst.” – Leonard Cohen.
The Failure of Partisan Politics, and How We May Advance Beyond It
In spite of the reality, many Americans still believe that their partisan political economic system is the best in the world, and the best that we can produce. They believe that the people must be faced with a choice between partisan political candidates who are sanctioned and sponsored by an official partisan political party and its supporting interest groups. And, even though Independents are allowed to "run" for office, the system is rigged to enable the two major official parties to be the main competitors, and one of their candidates always wins the winner-take-all contest for the presidency.They were winning even before the Supreme Court gave banks, corporations, Political Action Committees (PACs) and individuals unlimited financial power to influence and buy elections, the wealthiest one percent of the population had been providing 80 percent of the funding for the campaigns of both Republicans and Democrats.
If you read the article on Partisan Politics you may see how and why our partisan political system has failed. And while there are many reasons for that failure, perhaps the biggest one is that the partisan political system is based on a deep lack of trust in the people to make wise choices on their own.
What we need is free choice, because we can trust that, given total freedom and equal opportunity to actually and freely choose who we want to represent us in government, the vast majority of the people will make good choices, especially if we have an educated, informed public citizenry.
Unfortunately, the forces of greed and self-interest have waged a propaganda war to mislead and deceive Americans. Certain Republicans or Libertarians or Federalists have even claim that Thomas Jefferson was against Democracy. in fact, in 2004 one of them even fabricated a "quote" they attributed to Jefferson saying he wrote "Democracy is nothing more than mob rule."
That, of course, is absurd. If you read the writings of Jefferson it becomes obvious that Jefferson was a champion of Democracy. And, as is explained in the article on Jeffersonian Democracy, experts have said there is absolutely no evidence that Jefferson wrote that quote. In fact, it is contrary to his actual words and actions, which make it clear that Jefferson, like most of the other Founders, wanted America to be a Democracy and a Democratic Republic. But the forces of greed and self-interest have been whittling away at Democracy to the point where we now have an Oligarchy and a Plutocracy.
That is why we should alter and reform our government peacefully, as the Founding Fathers knew would be necessary at some point.
"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times." -- Thomas Jefferson
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men. Therefore the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require.” -- John Adams
The updated Declaration proposes how we could utilize Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution, which the Founding Fathers provided so that we may establish Constitutional amendments to ensure our full and equal rights, and have truly representational government.
As the Declaration and the article on How the Meek Shall Inherit the Earth suggests, we can prevent the buying of elections by the wealthiest few. We can eliminate the long, divisive partisan campaign process. We can eliminate paid political advertisements. We can put an end to the divisive partisan political competition for the "throne" of chief executive power, and instead adopt a way to better share the power in a more representational and fair way.
We can, by write-in ballot, nominate and ultimately elect an executive council of six women and six men for an Executive Council, and we can be free to choose whoever we want as members -- people who we think are the most wise, the most fair, the most conscientious and the most admirable people, who are well known for their good works in behalf of all humanity and our world. And we can choose them fromany walk of life, because it is the content of their character that should be of utmost importance and the most important qualification.
Of course, it is quite possible that not all those citizens who would be nominated as the most popular choices made by the write-in ballot process would accept the call to serve. However, the twelve men and women who are among the most popular choices who do accept, would be elected and become real representatives of the people in an executive council in the executive branch of government, replacing the chief executive.
There is a danger, of course, that there may be enough right-wing extremists in the country to nominate and elect a few of their leaders to sit on the council, and even though they would surely be overruled by the majority, they could cause conflicts and divisions just as they do now in the legislative and judicial branches of government. However, there is a high probability that when this message is well known and widespread, and when the right-wing extremists are faced with its truth and righteous judgment, many will realize how and why they have been misled. Therefore, the remaining, hard-headed, die hard extremists will be a small fringe minority, with no power.
That is why it is so important to spread the word about this message, and to discuss it in every way possible. For a reformation of government would produce a far greater and more representative democracy than we have now. The council could operate by consensus, and choose their own facilitator, spokesperson(s) and cabinet members, which could be from among them, or chosen in the traditional way according to education, expertise, and skills.
Furthermore, as is explained in How the Meek Shall Inherit the Earth, we can change and improve Congress, State Legislatures, City Councils and other similar bodies. We could choose people who we think would best represent us, as described in the declaration – people who seek to collaborate to further a just cause and a positive constructive agenda, rather than fight for and win power over others.
We could choose wisely and elect legislative, policy-making bodies made up of fair-minded people who simply want to put their heads together and serve as equals to create truly good government, with good policies, rules, regulations and laws that will benefit all of us, protect all of us, and serve all of us.
In other words, we can, and we should, establish a Real Democracy, with good government that will serve all the people, promote the general welfare and use the common wealth for the common good in order to ensure domestic tranquility.
We should consider that the early Greeks established a pretty good form of democracy 400 years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. The word Democracy comes from the Greek word meaning "rule of the people." One Greek wrote that "power should be in the hands of the whole people," rather than in the hands of one monarchical chief executive or an oligarchy of a relative few, and many agreed. Some even had the idea was that all citizens must have an equal voice, and there was recognition that in a democracy the poor have more power than the rich, because there are more of them.
Unfortunately, before long that idea was ignored. In fact, the idea about the poor having more political power than the rich died out pretty quickly, and it was replaced by the idea that political leadership should rightfully be in the hands of a deserving, superior, virtuous aristocracy.
The problem is, as it has often been throughout history ever since then, that true virtue has often not been the hallmark of political leadership. In fact, very often political power has been in the hands of a corrupt wealthy few who have been able to impose their will by hiring paid armed guards, police forces and armies. And most nations and states have been ruled by the richest few who have considered themselves royalty, nobility, aristocracy, or the upper class.
Americans, of course, are not comfortable talking about class, unless it’s about the "middle class," because they don’t want to admit there’s an upper and lower class. But, whatever the wealthiest few Americans consider themselves these days, even now they are the privileged few who hold and control 95 percent of the wealth and power.
Of course, Thomas Jefferson called such people "pseudo-aristocracy,"and he thought political leadership should not be determined by wealth, but by education and true virtue. That's why he and other Founders tried to plant the seed of real democracy in America in 1776, believing that government should exist only by the consent of the governed, and that all citizens and all religions should be regarded as equal in the sight of the government.
But it did not really take hold. The wealthiest few have always figured out how to make it appear as if the government had the "consent of the governed" by giving the people the choice between candidates for office who are presented and authorized by opposing partisan political parties. But, those opposing partisan parties have been financed by the wealthiest few, now more than ever.
Of course, this is not just an American phenomenon. Most people in most nations are in the same boat. But, while some people think partisan party politics will do the trick if only they can achieve victory over the opposing party; while some other people think the only answer is in some form of Communism (which Karl Marx came up with in the mid-1800s); and while still other people think that Religious Theocracy will establish good and righteous government, they are ALL wrong.
First, partisan party politics only perpetuates conflict, division, and instability, and while it may create the appearance of having the "consent" of the people, that is a stretch. Secondly, while Communists were justifiably angered at the European capitalistic nobility and aristocracy, they were wrong in calling for violent revolution to overthrow and destroy the capitalists, and most subsequent Communists have been even more wrong in advocating and perpetuating totalitarian rule. And thirdly, "good theocracy" is an oxymoron, because true servants of God do not seek to rule the people. Instead, true servants of God seek to counsel, liberate and empower the people.
Now is the time for all good, conscientious people to come together, to stand up and demonstrate your will and be counted, to bring about a peaceful, nonviolent revolution and reformation and establish government that is truly of, for and by the people. For the average people who are the humble and meek of this world shall indeed inherit the earth. But it will not happen unless and until we make it happen.
Even Though Money Now Rules, the People Can Have the True Power
We will not have true democracy until we stop and prevent the power of money to influence political campaigns, or to influence politicians, law-makers and policy makers, and fool people.
Americans need to realize that in that regard, the U.S. Supreme Court decision to allow giant corporations to invest as much money as they want in political campaigns and political advertisements is an atrociously wrong and bad decision.
Deceptively known as "Citizens United" v FEC, it was actually Corporations vs The Citizens, and it wound up that corporations won because the Court dictated that private businesses, including for-profit corporations, have a right to spend as much money as they want to elect or defeat candidates in political campaigns at all levels.
That Court decision reversed numerous Supreme Court precedents and dozens of long-standing campaign finance laws at the federal and state level. And the incredible thing is that they didn't stop there.
In early April 2014 a 5-4 Court ruling struck down a previous law limiting overall campaign contribution limits. The former law that the ruling wiped out had previously prevented individuals from contributing more than $123,000 per election cycle to candidates and party committees. But ,the conservative ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission No. 12-536 enabled Billionaires to have unlimited individual power to influence elections and try to buy elections.
The Court in the 2010 Citizens United v FEC case had already given corporations and Political Action Committees free license to flood the broadcast media to buy elections. But the McCutcheon ruling gives the wealthiest few total, unlimited power. So, if you think the political television attack ads have been bad so far, get ready for them to get much, much worse.
Of course, the five right-wing justices claim it’s a matter of "freedom of speech,” but that’s a very transparent and obvious rationalization. Freedom of speech is not the issue.
Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to buy elections and buy the United States government. The issue is that the court is legalizing unfairness and damaging and destroying equal opportunity, because you and I cannot afford to make our voices heard. But now the greediest of Billionaires have unlimited power to flood the electronic, print and broadcast media with their corporate propaganda and deception.
It should be noted, though, that in his dissent in Citizens United, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens pointed out the truth:
"When citizens turn on their televisions and radios before an election and hear only corporate electioneering, they may lose faith in their capacity, as citizens, to influence public policy. A Government captured by corporate interests, they may come to believe, will be neither responsive to their needs nor willing to give their views a fair hearing. The predictable result is cynicism and disenchantment: an increased perception that large spenders call the tune and a reduced willingness of voters to take part in democratic governance." -- Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens
Justice Stevens added that: "To the extent that corporations are allowed to exert undue influence in electoral races, the speech of the eventual winners of those races may also be chilled. Politicians who fear that a certain corporation can make or break their reelection chances may be cowed into silence about that corporation."
Increasingly during the last four years we find that Justice Stevens was absolutely correct.
Billionaires are free to buy elections and buy the government. For example, the Citizens United vs. FEC ruling allowed a record $7 Billion to be spent by corporations and PACs in the 2012 election cycle. And that and the newer ruling will further enable the wealthiest few and their corporations, banks and financial institutions to further establish what amounts to a Plutocracy and Corporatocracy (even more than they already have).
Some saner heads in the Senate are attempting in Senate Joint Resolution 19 to rectify the problem, but members of the billionaire Koch brothers’ Tea Party are fighting tooth and nail against it.
For example, on May 23, 2014, Tea Party Senator Ted Cruz deceptively accused Senate Democrats of trying to “repeal the First Amendment.”
Cruz was speaking at a gathering of leaders of the “Christian Right” sponsored by James Dobson’s “Family Research Council” when he said:
“When you think it can’t get any worse, it does. This year, I’m sorry to tell you, the United States Senate is going to be voting on a constitutional amendment to repeal the First Amendment.”
Cruz said, “Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has announced the Senate Democrats are scheduling a vote on a constitutional amendment to give Congress the authority to regulate political speech, because elected officials have decided they don’t like it when the citizenry has the temerity to criticize what they’ve done.” And further, Cruz said: “They don’t like it when pastors in their community stand up and speak the truth.”
The truth, however, was that Cruz was very misleading and deceptive, because he was referring to Senate Joint Resolution 19 which of course has nothing to do with repealing the First Amendment free speech rights.
In fact, the Resolution would simply undo the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in the highly partisan political 5-4 decisions in the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases, which reversed precedents regarding campaign financing laws and enabled the rich to spend as much as they want to try to buy elections. To counter that, the Resolution calls for a Constitutional Amendment that would grant Congress and the states the power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to federal and state elections, respectively.
Senate Joint Resolution 19 is badly needed, because as the good Justice Breyer in his dissent in the McCutcheon case wrote: “Taken together with Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U. S. 310 (2010), today’s decision [on McCucheon] eviscerates our Nation’s campaign finance laws, leaving a remnant incapable of dealing with the grave problems of democratic legitimacy that those laws were intended to resolve.”
How and Why Republican Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court
Fail to Understand the Constitution
The five Republican Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court fail to understand the intent of the large majority of the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, and they also fail to understand that the Constitution was so progressive that it is still ahead of our time.
If one studies the debates that occurred at the Constitutional Convention from May 29, 1787 to September 17th of 1787, that conclusion becomes very clear.
Those debates began with a minority of members of the Convention assuming its purpose was merely to improve the existing Articles of Confederation, not replace it with a Constitution. And they also assumed that the confederation of sovereign states would continue, rather than be united as one nation.
However, over the course of the Convention, that minority was overruled by the consensus of the great majority who understood that their purpose was to replace the failed Articles of Confederation with a Constitution that would give the central government the power to regulate interstate commerce and to ensure the integrity and ethical principles of the Union.
When the Convention began on May 29th, the first speaker, who turned out to be in the minority, put forth an argument about the right to vote, and while he voiced the opinion of many in proposing a House of Representatives to be elected by the people, he argued for a Senate whose members would be the most wealthy and powerful, to be elected out of the House of Representatives by Electors, not by the people.
Consequently, from the very start of the Convention there was tension, because while a minority of the landed and wealthy aristocracy wanted to exercise power over the public, the majority believed the power should be with the people and according to the vote of the people. So the argument then was significantly similar to what it is today, and the argument is perpetuated because wealthy Republicans and Libertarians today do not realize, or refuse to admit, that the argument was settled by the writing of the Constitution.
Of course it took some serious debate to settle the argument. But by June 4th, 1787 it had become very evident that the proponents of a powerful aristocracy were actually supporters of the traditional European hereditary principle of aristocratic rulership, and even Monarchy. But James Madison and others were quite ready to point out that a ruling wealthy Aristocracy and Monarchy was the very thing that the Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War had intended to overthrow and eliminate in America.
The debate went back and forth for a while, because the minority of wealthy aristocrats believed in the superiority of aristocrats. And some of them wanted to place the authority of the states above that of the national government, even though that idea actually violated the original purpose of the Convention.
Madison then stated that their purpose was to form a national government and they must therefore abandon the ideas in the Articles of Confederation, and his statements in favor of Democracy squelched arguments against Democracy.
Fortunately, Madison spoke for the great majority, and thus the transition from the former aristocratic order into a new, innovative democratic order was established. And the Constitution that was produced was intended to ensure that there would be no superiority of wealthy aristocrats over the poor, which was a unique advancement and improvement over all prior governments throughout history.
From June 8th onward, the whole focus of the Convention was upon how to prevent the new nation from becoming like the European nations had been and still were – aristocratic and plutocratic, and not democratic. And the crux of the U.S. Constitution that was produced is reflected in the Constitution's Sovereignty Clause:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
That is why the U.S. Constitution was and still is a revolutionary, progressive document. And yet, in spite of the truth and the facts, modern, wealthy, conservative Republicans and Libertarians have been and still are persistent in claiming that the Constitution is a conservative document designed solely to protect and benefit the wealthy. But they are simply wrong, and they are blinded by their own self interests.
Here’s the truth:
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men. Therefore the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity and happiness require.” -- John Adams
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness." -- Declaration of Independence, 1776
That is as true now as it was in 1776, and we, the people, should take it to heart, because during the last 30 years the U.S. Government has steadily become destructive regarding our civil liberties, rights and opportunities, while enabling an "upper" aristocratic class of incredibly wealthy people to profit far beyond what is reasonable or fair, at our expense, at the expense of our nation, and at the expense of our earth and environment.
(Continued at Real Democracy, Part 2, which further discusses how and why we will have real democracy, and makes further suggestions and recommendations.)
Part 2: Real Democracy Is Coming to the U.S.A
How and Why We, The People, Must Progress Forward
Fortunately, the U.S. Constitution contains provisions that enable Congress and the states to overturn such Supreme Court decisions that unfairly favor the rich with ordinary legislation. One of those provisions is in Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2, which states that there are exceptions to the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction, and Congress may overrule the Court through the legislative process (which is what Senate Joint Resolution 19 is about, as previously mentioned).
The Founding Fathers carefully wrote the Constitution to protect the republic against a rogue Court, including the “Exceptions Clause” because they foresaw the potential problems that could be caused by a partisan Court that serves special interests (as the present Court does).
With that clause, and with The 21st Century Declaration of Independence, we the people can and must overrule the Court, because it was bad enough that corporate funding of political campaigns had already driven the ad wars, and corporate lobbyists wield all the power that money can buy to influence and bribe members of Congress. Now the rich can spend all they want to buy elections, and corporate lobbyists indulge in bribery even more.
For example, watch this video of the Sixty Minutes interview of lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who finally listened to his conscience and exposes the utter corruption of lobbyists and members of Congress. And consider that just in the first three months of 2009 the corporations and industries spent at least $500 Million on lobbying to influence politicians in Washington, D.C. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce spent $47 Million last year on political issue ads on TV, mostly against health care reform, and they spent another $144 Million on lobbying Congress to fight any regulation of corporations.
In fact, the Chamber of Commerce is the most powerful influence on the public and on Congress, serving the interest of profit-making corporations to the detriment of the environment and the public. And now, the court’s ruling has enabled new right-wing groups like the American Action Network (ANN), which paid for slanderous, misleading and often false attack ads against Democrats in the 2010 mid-term election season and later during the fight over health care reform. It’s funded by the ultra wealthy and their corporations, and its board consists of right-wing Republican politicians and millionaire and billionaire businessmen, industrialists and financiers.
They know who serves their interests most obediently, and their most loyal servants now include Republicans in Congress and five members of the Supreme Court. That is one of the reasons why money now rules more completely than ever before. The powers-that-be are the wealthiest few, and they serve their own interests at our expense.
We must, therefore, face facts, because civilization, and indeed even the human race, will not survive if right-wing “Conservatives” keep either having their way or obstructing and preventing reform and progress.
The truth is that what they strive to conserve are mainly the political, economic and religious traditions and institutions that have allowed them to gain power, wealth and domain in the world. And, in fact, their focus on materialistic concerns has caused them to lose sight of what is most valuable in the world, which we should conserve above all else.
That is clear if you look at what they have NOT conserved.
Just look at the degradation and deterioration of our environment, the oceans, our waterways, our atmosphere, our infrastructure, and the standard of living of the majority of the people and especially the working poor — all of which have suffered because the wealthiest few control most of the wealth, invest much of it in lobbying legislators and buying or influencing elections, and want government to spend taxpayers money mainly on police and military forces and all other means that will protect their wealth and enable them to gain more.
The culture of greed and self-interest they have created has, especially during the last hundred years, been detrimental to many people in the world, and it has brought a terrible tribulation upon the earth. And we, the people, are the only ones who can and will fix it -- by initiating and peacefully bringing about a reformation of both religion and government so that they both serve the interests of humanity as a whole body.
As it is, our government not only favors the wealthiest few at our expense. It also violates our civil liberties. So we could, for instance, repeal or amend the FISA laws that have enabled the government to violate our privacy, to wire tap and spy on citizens in violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. (That's because the FISA law gives all the power not to any of the three branches of government, but to one man, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who alone appoints the FISA court members who give approval to the NSA and other surveillance and intelligence agencies. And since the FISA court is rigged by a right-wing ideologue, it has ignored and violated the Constitution, which is why FISA and the NSA have come under such heavy criticism lately.)
We, the people, can change all that, in America and in all nations. The fulfillment of the actual, real prophecies of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and of all other divinely inspired religions of the world, foretells it. The prophets foresaw a future of harmony and peace following this terrible conflict and tribulation. But, we will not enter that future unless and until we expose and refute the hypocrites and establish freedom and justice for all. That, in fact, is what Jesus of Nazareth intended, foresaw, and prophesied, as did all other genuine prophets.
A Democratic Republic
What we need is a Democratic Republic, with real Democracy. That is what Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and other Founding Fathers tried to establish, but even though they prevailed in their day against the Hamiltonian Federalists who claimed they wanted a Republic, Jefferson's and Madison's view eventually faded because the Hamiltonian idea persisted and prevailed in the long run. Why? Because it was more like Plato’s, whose writings and ideas have influenced and enabled wealthy elites and aristocracies ever since.
The traditional definition of a real Republic is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizenry entitled to vote, and political power is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by the whole body of citizens.
You see, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and other Framers of the Constitution were indeed concerned about the what democracy could become, which is why they tried to establish a balance of government powers and limits on power, and an intricate system of checks and balances. But they wanted a Democracy in a Democratic Republic, and they trusted in the ability of the people to use a democratic process to try to establish a government that was of the people, by the people, and for the people, which would promote the general welfare and ensure domestic tranquility and justice for all the people, and deal with ongoing problems.
That was in large part why the Founders, including Madison, wrote the Commerce Clause granting Congress power to regulate interstate commerce, assuming that democratically elected representatives of the people would actually serve in the best interests of all citizens to promote the general welfare of all the American people.
Unfortunately, the Reaganite ideology runs counter to that in many ways, as is discussed in several other articles. And that is especially evident in the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court, which is apparently preparing to reverse the Founding Fathers with regard to the Commerce Clause. That is because five Reaganite Republican justices -- John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito, believe in what Ronald Reagan said at the end of his second term as president.
Reagan said: "There's a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts." He also said: "Through more and more rules and regulations and confiscatory taxes, the government was taking more of our money, more of our options, and more of our freedom."
That was extremely misleading, but, because it was delivered by a very charming television performer and corporate pitchman who may have sincerely believed what he said, many people believed it.
Now, however, Americans should understand Ronald Reagan's Real Legacy, and understand that the Reaganite ideology was born of a merger of a pseudo-conservative movement called Neo-Conservatism and corporate propaganda, which Reagan learned well from top executives at the General Electric Corporation as he was very carefully groomed in the 1950s and '60s for a career in politics.
The Reaganite ideology has sought to indoctrinate Americans with the idea that government is the problem, not the solution, that labor unions are bad, that government regulations are oppressive and wrong, and that taxes are “confiscatory” and unfair, and take away our freedom.
The truth, however, is that our freedom is ensured not by banks or corporations. Our freedom is ensured only by a good government the protects us all, that promotes the general welfare and ensure justice for all. And, even though the Reaganites have succeeded during the last 30 years in selling that ideology to many Americans, it is actually an un-American, un-Constitutional ideology concocted by the greediest of the wealthiest few who simply do not want to be regulated or taxed according to their ability to pay.
Government cannot operate without sufficient revenue to provide sufficient regulation of commerce, to provide for public safety and the common defense, to build and maintain the infrastructure, promote the general welfare, and ensure justice for all -- among all the other things that good government should provide. And in order to do that all citizens need to contribute to the common wealth for the common good, and pay taxes according to their ability to pay.
In spite of that, the Reaganites on the U.S. Supreme Court operate under the assumption that Reaganism is a good ideology and that the Federalist Society that was formed during Reagan’s first term as president is correct in its interpretation of the Constitution. But Reagan was wrong, and the Federalist Society is wrong, which is readily apparent by the utter failure of Reaganism as it infected America with a corrupt culture of greed and self-interest that increasingly caused more and more problems during the last 30 years.
We still suffer from it, not only because the Supreme Court made things worse in its recent decisions favoring corporations and the wealthiest few to the detriment of the vast majority of the people, but because Republicans and even some Democrats in Congress and the Executive Branch have done the same.
That is why we need a reformation of government, recognizing that a real Republic is a state in which the supreme power rests in the body of citizenry entitled to vote, and political power is exercised by representatives chosen directly or indirectly by the whole body of citizens, not merely the wealthiest few who think their wealth entitles them to rule.
However, as was stated above, we should be able to directly choose who represents us, because as it is the U.S.A. is neither a Republic nor a Democracy, and we the people do not have free choice to determine who represents us. We are presented with choices, which gives the appearance that we have a choice.
That is ultimately our fault, because we allowed it, albeit unwittingly and naively. But it is largely the fault of both Republicans and Democrats, and even though the Republicans are worse, the Democrats have proven themselves to actually be the “lesser of two evils” that divide us and keep us divided and weak.
Right-wing Republicans are the worst, however, because they blatantly serve the forces of greed and self-interest while pretending to serve all the people. But we should understand whySocrates believed that the philosophic soul has reason, will, and desires united in virtuous harmony. A good philosopher has the moderate love for wisdom and the courage to act according to wisdom, and wisdom is knowledge about the good or the right relations between all people.
The Wisdom of Socrates is rather like the Wisdom of King Solomon, who wrote that: “Wisdom produces friends of God and prophets. She is firm, but Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all Her paths are peace. She is a Tree of Life to them that lay hold upon Her. And Wisdom is far better than weapons of war.”
To be even more specific, Solomon also wrote, in the same vein, "Be wise and consider the ways of the ants, which having no guide, overseer or ruler, provide food in the summer and gather in the harvest."
That is consistent with the wisdom of Samuel, who wrote: "If you want a king, you reject God."
It is also consistent with Jeremiah's prophecy, which states: "In those days, and at that time, will I cause the Branch of righteousness to grow up unto David; and he shall execute judgment and righteousness in the land. In those days shall Judah be saved, and Jerusalem shall dwell safely: and this is the name wherewith she shall be called, The Lord of our righteousness. For thus says the Lord: David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel." -- Jeremiah 33:15-17
The Lord of Righteousness is not actually "she," as Jeremiah wrote, nor is the Lord our God a man, nor a son of man, as Moses wrote. For God, by any other name, is God the Eternal Infinite One, the Great Spirit-Parent of all. And God's will is for government to not be on the shoulders of one man, but for one man who was chosen by God to liberate and empower the people so that they may govern themselves.
When government is not of the people, by the people, or for the people, whoever rules does not serve all the people. If we are ruled by an aristocracy, a wealthy elite, a nobility, an oligarchy, philosopher kings, or a presidential form of monarchy, we cannot have government of, by, or for the people. For power in the hands of one, or a privileged few, does not produce a true Democracy or Republic.
Therefore, Plato’s logic, like Hamilton's, is flawed in the opinion about who should be entitled to rule, because it is aristocratic. It led to the idea that certain people are entitled to rule over the masses. That idea ruled Europe, and it even tainted the views of some of the Founders of the United States of America.
For example, that idea motivated the Hamiltonian Federalists to strive to establish a “Republic” as a “Christian Meritocracy.” That is because Alexander Hamilton, in his bid for the presidency, put forth the idea that wealthy Christians were entitled to rule meritoriously, because they had “made good” with financial success, and were morally good.
That, of course, is not necessarily true. Greedy, selfish people can and have become very rich, and hypocrites can and do pretend to be Christians and thump their bible to gain respect and power. That has been proven true many times even in the short history of the United States of America, and it has proven true especially during the last 30 years.
Unfortunately, the Hamiltonian Federalist idea was picked up again in the early 1920s, and we all know how that turned out (and thank God Franklin D. Roosevelt saved the country from that). But, in spite of that, the Republicans under Ronald Reagan picked it up again in 1981 – that idea of a Republican Christian Meritocracy – and it has flourished and persisted even to today.
Now, we, the people, must act to stop the madness, the corruption, the abuse of power, the unfairness, and the injustice. Only we, the people, can establish justice, equity, and fairness, by establishing a real democracy in which the Supreme Court justices are appointed by an executive council, not a partisan president. That would ensure justice for all.
If we don't stand up for ourselves, who will? And if not now, when?
The Messiah says it is up to us all. So let's assume the power to determine our destiny and share our divine inheritance. Let's do what needs to be done.
Further and More Specific Recommendations
Following up on what is written in the article on The 21st Century Declaration of Independence, there are some further suggestions and recommendations, which the people may or may not want to consider and follow. It is up the the people.
Since, according to the declaration and resulting Constitutional amendments, an Executive Council of Citizens would be chosen by free, popular vote, some of the most popular choices may not feel able to accept the call to serve in such a way. And, among the most popular choices who do accept the call, there would probably be people with a wide variety of knowledge and expertise but not necessarily that required for the executive branch of government.
Therefore, they would need a larger and more comprehensive cabinet or staff to advise them, and while their cabinet of secretaries of the different departments may be chosen from among the council if and when appropriate, they could also be chosen in the traditional way according to education, expertise, training and skills, and approved by the council. And, being well advised, the council could appoint justices for the Supreme Court who would be fair, ethical, and non-partisan.
The council itself may include politicians, of course. But, given the people's free choice, it would probably include mostly citizens from other walks of life. They would be citizens who are widely respected for their wisdom, fairness and good will, and known for their humanitarian good works, who can listen and learn, make decisions and work with each other and the legislative and judicial branches to establish fairness and justice, as well as ensure that internal revenue is sufficient to balance the budget and provide ample surplus for emergencies, and that the common wealth is used for the common good.
Such a government could establish fair, reasonable wage and price controls to raise the lowest incomes and lower the highest incomes to produce equity and sharply reduce the enormously huge income gap between the richest few and poorest. It could acknowledge that we are all created equal and are endowed by our Creator with the unalienable and equal human right to not only pursue happiness, but to have the equal opportunity and right to enjoy it.
The following are other things it could and should do:
1) Repeal the Bush tax cuts for those with household incomes of more than $150,000 a year, and instead tax the wealthiest Americans and their banks, lending institutions and corporations at reasonable, fair rates, up to 50 percent for the highest incomes, and eliminate all the tax loopholes, shelters, and "write-offs" for charitable donations.
2) Levy a tax on stock trading transactions (which are currently not taxed), to discourage day trading and reckless gambling, and to reduce volatility of the stock market.
3) Levy a tax on American corporations that will prevent or at least discourage relocating American jobs to other countries.
4) Repeal or amend all "free trade" laws and agreements that so obviously favor the wealthiest few and their giant corporate conglomerates, and are thus terribly detrimental and destructive to small businesses and family owned businesses and farms.
5) Ensure that all Americans pay the same Social Security tax on all of their income, and stop allowing the very wealthy to pay such a smaller percentage than the average person does. Additionally, ensure that the Social Security and Medicare programs are a safety net for those who actually need it, operating to ensure that people receive coverage payments when and as needed, so that retired millionaires and billionaires who don’t need it cannot take money out of the Social Security fund, and so that it can provide an adequate income for the elderly, the disabled, and all others unable to work who would not otherwise have an income adequate to provide a decent standard of living.
6) Reinstate The Banking Act of 1933, also called the Glass-Steagall Act, which regulated how business is conducted by Wall Street and the banks. It established the FDIC and banking reforms to control speculation, and it regulated interest rates in savings accounts. However, it was repealed by a Republican Congress in 1999 who served the interests of bankers and financial institutions, and the consequences of that repeal have been disastrous and inevitably led to the economic and financial crises of 2007–2013.
6) Repudiate the unfair and biased policies of Ronald Reagan and the Reaganites, especially regarding: Reaganomics or "trickle down" supply side economics; the Reaganite "foreign aid" that funds and finances dictatorial regimes of other countries as long as they profess to be America's "allies"; the Reaganite effort to dismantle and destroy Roosevelt's New Deal programs; the Reaganite efforts to "privatize" public services and other services and facilities to make them for profit; and the Reaganite effort to destroy organized labor unions and collective bargaining.
7) Encourage, enable and help people to establish non-profit worker cooperatives, public cooperatives, public banks (such as North Dakota's State Bank), and all manner of other non-profit enterprises, businesses, industries and initiatives.
Ultimately, the mission of the modern son of man is to liberate and empower humanity, so that the final decisions on how they want their governments to be are theirs. The people should determine their own destiny, and have the ongoing responsibility to govern themselves through freely chosen representatives who will establish and maintain a sustainable political and economic system that uses the common wealth for the common good, and benefits all humanity and the earth on which we live.
He also suggests, however, that the government should reform and regulate commerce requiring that all businesses and industries to operate a little more like what we call non-profit basis. That is, charge the public for products, produce, goods and services only enough to cover the actual costs of operating the business or industry, including the costs of overhead and things like maintenance, improvements, growth and research and development, along with the salaries of all the employees (including the chief executive officer or CEO). And he also suggests that the income disparity between the lowest and highest paid employees should not make the income of corporate CEO’s any more than twenty times greater than the lowest paid employee. (But, that’s just his opinion. It’s up to you all to determine what is fair.)
He also agrees with Thomas Jefferson, who tried (but failed) to establish a law providing free higher education at public expense to all qualified students, regardless of their parentage or wealth. For he, like Jefferson, is against what Jefferson called a “psuedo-aristocracy” consisting of a privileged wealthy few. Jefferson saw true aristocrats as the most successful people from all walks of life, who would succeed in a society which enables all people to have equal opportunity to live up to their God-given potential.
It makes sense that our doctors, lawyers, scientists, teachers, professors and other professionals whose professional qualifications require the highest and longest educations, should be rewarded the highest incomes, also based according to the proficiency, merits and effectiveness of their work. Meritorious reward is a natural and spiritual value, in that we should reap what we sow and should get what we deserve.
However, that does not mean that the “common laborers” who work in the fields on the farms should be paid less than twenty time less than those who earn the highest incomes. For as it is, most corporate CEOs in America rake in about five hundred times more than their own lowest paid employees, and a thousand times more than the lowest paid workers in the country. No one is that much more valuable than anyone else who works hard for a living.
We are all created equal, and anyone who works hard for a living should be paid a decent living wage sufficient to enable their family to live a comfortable life, in a comfortable dwelling, able to afford all the things that most Americans have come to regard the basic necessities of life. And all workers, no matter what work they do, should pay their fair share of taxes according to their ability to pay, so that the government can ensure that the common wealth serves the common good.
This message was originally published in 4 books and summarized at realprophecyunveiled.netfirms.com and then at reformationcomingsoon.bravehost.com, sites which no longer exist. The author's initial pen name was Joseph J. Adamson or Joseph James Adamson, but he is known by many names and titles by different religions as is explained in Prophecies Re: He Who Fulfills Them. However, he knows he is but a servant-messenger of God and like a blade of grass that withers and dies, while the message is an important and lasting testament and interceding judgment.
VERY IMPORTANT, MUST WATCH - SCARY REALITY: "OBAMA ROTHSCHILD'S CHOICE. FULL FEATURE" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLJU4ZOfTl0