Posted on 04/16/2003 9:40:21 AM PDT by SpinyNorman
Editorial
The death of real democracy
By Andrew Wodin-Schwartz, UMass student
April 15, 2003
The current political situation in the United States of America is following a trend toward anti-democracy. With the Cold War now safely in the past, once again our wealth and power is being challenged, this time by a new force that has been largely dubbed "terrorists" or "Muslims" (the two are virtually indistinguishable in main-stream media). In response to these seemingly novel movements, the Bush administration has decided to declare ideological wars by taking many additional measures to ensure the continued growth of our wealth and the proliferation of our power. In doing so, not only has this government has taken on imperialist foreign policy policies, but within our domestic politics there have been many measures taken which blatantly contradict the original basis of our democracy.
For all practical purposes there is no longer any system of "checks and balances" in our government. The executive branch has given itself the authority, through overt manipulation of the legislative branch (ala Cheney and Rumsfeld's public scolding of Congressional dissenters, etc.), to take policing actions both against individual citizens of this country as well as those of other countries both inside and out of our nation's borders.
The Patriot Act of 2001 gave executive-branch agencies like the CIA untold power to investigate, without any necessary consent, suspicions of their choosing and detain persons suspected of a crime without needing the evidence to actually charge them with that crime. In direct conflict with the judicial code of the United States, "terrorist" suspects are actually presumed guilty until proven innocent and are tried by means outside of the judicial branch of government (military tribunals). The Proposed Domestic Security Enhancement Act seeks to increase these powers and even goes so far as to allow for an official branch of the domestic police that is directly controlled by the White House, thereby making it the first such written constitutional measure in a major "democratic" state since Robespierre's Reign of Terror. The No Child Left Behind Act requires high schools to submit students' personal, health, and academic records to military recruiters, thereby allowing them to focus more on those students that might be especially susceptible to being recruited. These acts, along with many others introduced by the Bush administration, are in direct opposition to the true democratic values of equality in law and in control of power.
Many Americans have accepted these measures without protest (much as have our 'democratic' representatives in government) because they have been told that to dissent would be detrimental to our mission of spreading democracy. The national consensus that this has created is in itself a threat to democracy because it eliminates the need for compromise and debate in policymaking. The most democratic man of all, Thomas Jefferson, once commented that, "consensus is the greatest threat to democracy." This insightful comment foreshadowed a trend in the capitalist democratic state, which we are now seeing, by which a consensus would allow disproportionately large accumulations of wealth and power by an oligarchic class and thereby convert the American democratic system into something which more closely resembles a fascist state. Our founding fathers would encourage us to always be skeptical of government and its intentions, especially a government that has accumulated as much power as ours has. They would push us to form our own opinions and ideas about the nature of political conduct as it occurs around us. Many have already taken this sound advice and are making their opinions clearly heard. George Bush has publicly declined to listen.
The job description of any democratic leader includes listening to one's constituents and acting upon what they say. When a "democratic" leader illegitimately seizes power and then rules on behalf of only part of the body that he represents (and even goes so far as to mention on a couple of occasions, arrogantly, that this is what he is doing) then something is wrong with that democratic system. When a series of laws are passed that violate the basic 10 principles of a constitution, something is wrong with that democracy. When it is commonplace for politicians to lie about motives to the public solely for the purpose of tricking them into showing support for something, then that is not democracy.
If our founding fathers were to see an abstract description of our political system in the United States today, they would most certainly not describe it as democracy, but rather as fascism. As an American citizen, I feel entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; I feel entitled to representation by my political representatives; and most of all I feel entitled to live in a nation, which practices what it preaches and does not intentionally try to fool its own citizenry every time it takes any action about anything. At the moment, these seemingly basic human rights that are supposed to be inherent of democracy are no longer existent under our system in the United States.
Though I was not 18 at the last presidential elections (or rather, "selection process"), I now am, and am thus entitled to at least have my voice heard and not blatantly ignored. The greatest threat to democracy is no longer "consensus," as was aptly put by Mr. Thomas Jefferson; no, the greatest single threat to any democracy on the planet is now George W. Bush and his administration of right-wing Christian fundamentalists. Impeach "President" Bush and allow the citizens of this country to place in power someone who will be capable of completing the leadership role asked of him. It takes a big man to be president of the United States, and George Bush simply is not that man. Get him out and end his siege on our great democracy. Support your Patriots for Peace and Justice, as we are fighting for democracy just as much as the G.I.'s shooting at impoverished Iraqis over in Baghdad.
I am tempted to write a response, but then, my mole status would be revealed.
On a brighter side, there was a Prolife demonstration on campus the other day, that naturally elicited violent response from the proabortion crowd, requiring the police to break it up. The prolife white crossed for the murdered babies are still up, though under the protection of student volunteers.
If he’s talking about Padilla and the others, they did not break a law within “the judicial branch of government.” They broke a “recognized law of warfare.” That does not fall within the civilian judicial system, according to everything I’ve read.
I’m perfectly comfortable letting the military handle the cases of people acting as enemy agents on behalf of a hostile entity during a time of public danger while posing as non-combatants. He’s essentially proposing something along the lines of trying a murder case in traffic court. It’s not the correct venue, IMO.
Also, I still can’t see the reason behind a male (?) having a hyphenated last name.
For all practical purposes there is no longer any system of "checks and balances" in our government. The executive branch has given itself the authority, through overt manipulation of the legislative branch (ala Cheney and Rumsfeld's public scolding of Congressional dissenters, etc…
Ah. The power of scolding! None dare stand before it and live!
Thank God Hitler never mastered the art of the fatal chastisement.
Men don't have hyphenated last names so since this person has a hyphenated last name they couldn't be a man.
Notice the "right wing fundamentalist christian" bashing in there. Could have been replaced with racist terms in the 30s-60s.
"Democracy in its purest form is being displayed in Iraq as we speak.
If he hurries the author of this brainless article can actually witness it first hand.
Policy policies? Looks like good ole Andy's a sophomore -- padding in hopes of a better grade.
As many other people in this thread have already pointed out we are not nor have ever been a democracy. To claim that Thomas Jefferson was "the most democratic man of all" is outright revisionism. And since we're throwing around Jefferson quotes; "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." Doesn't sound like the "most democratic man of all" to me.
Actually our founders would be more terrified of the fact our government is more of a democracy than what they intended. The infringements of our Constutional Rights isn't because of a lack of Democracy, but because of an abundance of it.
You mean, Dick Cheney? What, do these idiots think Gore would be president then, like as a "first runner-up"? "In case the winner cannot serve, the first runner-up will serve as Miss America President."
I know...why didn't the founding fathers see the giant flaw in the checks/balances plan---scolding could jut blow it away! I can't believe no president ever thought of this before....
You see, they never counted on the Vice President and the Defense Secretary launching the scolding coupe.
Evil geniuses!
This kid's funny, but now that's he's eighteen, we HAVE to listen to him!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.