Liberty, Democracy, & Monetary Reform 2

A new video I posted:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdc6Gbvx9tE

Arguing for a progressive view on monetary reform.  Links to 7 documentaries in the description box.

Less than 9 minutes long.  I hope you enjoy it.

Voting is a Right

Incredible--- that this actually has to be explained.

Voting is a Right.  It is your right as a citizen of the United States, just like any other civil right.  The monarchist, or anarchist, who says you don’t have a right but a “privilege” to vote, is simply wrong.   If anything, rights are the opposite of privilege.  This should be obvious.

There are two guiding principles of American government.  First is the principle of Liberty-- the belief that people have the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

The second is the principle of Democracy—the belief that sovereignty should be shared equally by all citizens.  It is the “Consent of the Governed” mentioned in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence.  Simply put, Liberty and Democracy are not opposing ideas; they are essential to each other.

And these two ideas have pretty much encompassed the world.  Most nations today enjoy a strong sense of freedom and democracy, and the average citizen enjoys a high standard of living.  We don’t want to lose this.

In many ways, we already have.  The corruption of the democratic process has been overtaking America for decades.  Money decides politics, and our democracy has been turned into some Orwellian game show.

Voter suppression through new Voter ID laws, draconian ballot access laws, secret and unlimited corporate finance, and outright fraud through electronic voting systems--- this is where we have come as a nation.  This is the direction we are going.

Now I’d be the first to advocate Open Primaries and public funding of elections, but that really isn’t going to happen is it?  Seriously, who would invest money in that idea?  A 20-dollar donation from 5000 people would be impressive, but that’s only a hundred grand.  Your US Congressman has millions.

And where the heck is the Democratic Party anyway?  Here in the 64^th State Representative district, they haven’t run a candidate for over a decade.  If that isn’t a clear sign of corruption, I don’t know what is.

You have the right to vote.  Not only is that right being assaulted, but the choices you have on the ballot are being manipulated horribly-- without any interest or regard to our civil liberties.  People should be upset about this.  Like my dad always said, “If you’re not fed up about something, you’re not paying attention.”

Your state representative has the power to introduce change.  It’s only one vote in the House, yes.  But it would be a voice of courage and not complicity.  Unfortunately, when big campaign donors are more important than voters, I imagine that decision isn’t quite so easy as it appears.

Your representative was complicit with the recent Voter ID laws pushed by Gov. Corbett.  Is that what we elected him to do?  Is the voice of our people also the voice of voter suppression?  Without the third-party candidate, there wouldn’t have been a choice at all!  Is this democracy?

And the Democratic Party in Venango is just as complicit-- For not running an opposition candidate, for not organizing their constituents, for not giving a rat’s petootee about the rights of the People, for not running a candidate in election, after election, after election.

It’s the same way with the Republican party down in Pittsburgh, I’m sure.  The terms “urban republican” and “rural democrat” rarely suggest any direct representation in their state government.

The result of our current circumstance is that your right to vote and to participate in the democratic process is almost non-existent.  All we have left is to go through the motions of voting, with blinders on to the corruption of it all.  It’s just sad that year after year, there’s really no choice on the ballot.

Any third-party competition has been virtually eliminated in Pennsylvania.  Unfair ballot access requirements, personal litigation, and outright stupidity have dominated our election laws for the past few decades. 

Yet registration levels in both R & D parties continues to decline as more and more people opt for independent or third party affiliation.  People are not stupid, and they’re not apathetic.  They count on their government to provide them with civil protection, infrastructure and social services, and their confidence in the R/D parties has been waning.

People don’t want to live under a totalitarian government.  If there is no opposition candidate, no public debate, if dumps of cash are the only means to election, then what does a vote actually represent?  Hope?  Please.

They’ve effectively turned our State Representative district into a Princedom, and our US Congressional district into a national Fiefdom.  Elected offices should not be open to the corruption of private investment.  Alas, free and fair elections are a thing of the past.

Notice I haven’t mentioned policy once so far.  This is because policy isn’t the core issue.  Policy aboard ship is irrelevant if the ship itself sinks or the captain goes mad.  A calm appeal to reason is essential to any debate.  It isn’t the results, but the process of government that confronts us today.

Frankly, somebody has to stop them.  The upper echelon of the Republican Party has gotten way out of hand.  The inmates have taken over the castle, and we need to take it back. We have to demand our right to vote and to participate in the electoral process.

More importantly, our Representatives need to demand our right to vote and participate.  Our elected representatives should demand free and fair elections.  The members of our state and national legislatures should represent the people, not the corruption of money.

This notion that government is implicitly “evil” is simply not true.  Democratic sovereignty is much more preferable to the alternatives.  Again, I find this incredible that in 2012 we still have to argue about this.

Look, I really like living here in Oil City.  I come home from work each day, sit on the back porch of my “humble abode”, and look over the Allegheny River valley.  It’s a great place to live, and I consider myself very fortunate.

My local government provides many services at a marginal cost.  The water supply here in Oil City is second to none.  We have cable internet, excellent trash pickup, the roads are relatively well maintained, and they run a bunch of cute public events during the year to bring everybody together.

Sure, we’re like every other small, dying city in western Pennsylvania burdened by debt and mild corruption.   But that isn’t what the people see day in and day out in our “pursuit of happiness”.   We’re just trying to live in peace.  So long as we remain guided by the principles of Liberty and Democracy, we’ll all be better off for it.

Pride of Nations - My Foreign Policy

I downloaded a new game last month on Steam... it's called "Pride of Nations" by Paradox Entertainment, a Swedish design group I've been following for years now.  I've played Europa Universalis III with a college professor and other friends, and also the Hearts of Iron series as a solo game... for hundreds of hours.

Interesting point about "gamers"... we don't talk politics.  Usually.  I mean, everyone is entitled to their opinions and their own pursuits, and I have to thank all my gamer friends who have tolerated my participation over the decades.  Like West Point graduates of the mid-1800's,, we know and respect each other.

These games are "epic scale", encompassing the entire Earth:  Europa Universalis begins in 1399 and proceeds as far as the early 1800s.  Hearts of Iron begins in 1936 and lasts until the end of an eventual World War Two.    If anyone wants to understand the expansion of "western civilization" over the world, these two games provide interesting models to consider.

But this latest game, Pride of Nations, just gave me the heebie-jeebies.  The game begins in 1850 and ends in 1920.  Think of that.  Just 70 years--  The "Victorian Age", the beginning of modern warfare.  The Age of Imperialism; the Age of Industrialism.  The Forge of the Modern Age.

I clicked on United States to begin a solo campaign-- and I just stared at it for a second, a minute, ten minutes... and I had to turn away.  Shut down!  NO WAY.  I can't deal with this.

The US begins the game barely "controlling" the eastern part of what we now call America.  The Spanish, the English, the Austrians.. you name it... and the "indigenous peoples" who would eventually be displaced and exterminated like so many Ukranians... I can't handle this "model".  It's too real.

But that's the fact of history.. the fact of reality, a fact of "Sovereignty".  Serously, what would YOUR foreign policy be in 1850 as the US player?

I have always, for over 30 years, been anti-war, anti-draft, anti-imperialism; yet I have always been drawn to games where the martial arts are involved.  The Art of War defines any claim to Sovereignty.  This has been true since the first campfires of civilization lit the night sky.

Those who seek Peace should prepare for War.  There is no alternative, no reasonable Excuse:  "Pandora will shit you out with zero warning."

And I quote Avatar here because, quite frankly it has been the most unquoted film of all time, in spite of it's epic success and acclaim.  When YOU seek to establish your personal "foreign policy", you really should resolve the issues presented in Avatar... from both perspectives.

I've tried, but I'm still thinking.

Is there a way to extend "sovereignty" without violating human rights?  I think there is.  But seriously, I'm looking for input here.  Please speak your mind in the comment section below.

Lincoln on OWS (Occupy Wall Street)

Below is from an email I received from the Alan Grayson campaign referring to a speech Lincoln gave to Congress just two years before the Gettysburg Address. I offer it here as an interesting, historical observation about Labor and Capital during the early years of the American Civil War. Of course, Lincoln was the first Republican president.

This is what President Lincoln said to Congress, to America, and to us:

"It is not needed, nor fitting here [in discussing the Civil War] that a general argument should be made in favor of popular institutions; but there is one point, with its connections, not so hackneyed as most others, to which I ask a brief attention. It is the effect to place capital on an equal footing with, if not above, labor, in the structure of government.

“It is assumed that labor is available only in connection with capital; that nobody labors unless somebody else, owning capital, somehow by the use of it induces him to labor. This assumed, it is next considered whether it is best that capital shall hire laborers, and thus induce them to work by their own consent, or buy them, and drive them to it without their consent. Having proceeded thus far, it is naturally concluded that all laborers are either hired laborers or what we call slaves. And further, it is assumed that whoever is once a hired laborer is fixed in that condition for life.

“Now, there is no such relation between capital and labor as assumed, nor is there any such thing as a free man being fixed for life in the condition of a hired laborer. Both these assumptions are false, and all inferences from them are groundless.

“Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."

Occupy Your Precinct

It may be possible to organize and change our federal government without corporate finance.  In fact, the only way to truly end the wholesale corruption of our US Legislature is to organize in spite of corporate money.  How can people do this?

There are over 500,000 registered voters in your US Congressional District.  These districts are broken down into "Precincts" where you, as a citizen, go to vote.  There are usually hundreds of precincts in each district.

100 active community leaders (i.e. anyone who wants to go outside and actually do something) located one-per precinct could generate:

• 3000 petition signatures in a single weekend (for ballot access or whatever)
• 10,000 fliers distributed to local neighborhoods in 3 hours
• 1000 yard signs distributed and maintained throughout the congressional district
• 500 supporting members, running local campaigns and helping out when they can
• 10,000 new registered voters in the district each year

Combine this model with another 100+ US Congressional Districts just like it, and you have a national movement capable of displacing the current power structure in America.

Seems simple enough?  Enter the question of "policy".  That's usually when everyone throws their hands up and goes home.  My view on policy is that it should outline the Social Contract--- bind the organization to a common trust, complete with a definition of rights and privileges of membership.  But that's me...

You, I, we each have the ability to occupy our own precincts.  Map your district, get a street list from the local county election board, and get voter registration effort started.  Combined with the efforts of others, the effect could be immense.

Ah, but how do you trust the others in the group?  How do you trust your very own candidate?  This needs to be resolved.  If it were up to me, I'd organize a national party at the Congressional District level, binding them to charters that guaranteed membership rights.  It is not up to me though.

It is up to you.  If you're willing to take responsibility for your precinct, and if 100 other people also take responsibility for theirs, and if those 100 precinct leaders formed a Congressional District committee, the people could stand up to financial control, win popular support and change their government.

As long as the policy doesn't suck :)

The Fringes of Empire

It is no secret.  Half of US discretionary spending is on "the military", and this spending has allowed the US to dominate world politics since World War 2.

America has been a colonial power since well before that, but it wasn't until WW2 that we made the transition to "superpower".  And while the US is certainly not alone in the suppression of billions of people around the world, it certainly dominates the game today.

But this little article isn't about all the big players, it's not even about democracy in the US.  I'd like to talk about you, and me, and the world we have come to expect when we wake each morning.

You and I, as US citizens, are living the American Dream.  The oil from the world flows to the US, gets refined and distributed, and you pump it into your gas tank.  You probably complain from time to time about how expensive gas has become.

As a human being, you probably have some empathy for other people throughout the world.  You're probably distressed when you hear about massacres, injustices and trillion-dollar war budgets.  After all, it's not your fault that these things are happening.  It's not your fault that we invaded Iraq and hundreds of other forgotten places around the world.  I'm sure you'd vote to change that too.

Have you considered, though, what the effect would be of a major military withdrawal of US forces from its commitments, hot and cold, around the world?  Have you considered what would actually happen if the US "defense" budget was cut by 50% and we stopped the wars, stopped supporting dictatorships, and stopped providing military force for the US version of the East India Tea Company?

That's right.  Bitch now about gas prices, but recognize that it is US foreign policy that makes it possible for you to budget your daily life back and forth to work, and the store, and to visit your friends and family.

So much of the worlds' resources flow to the US.  It's just a fact.  It's not because we're awesome, or we're divinely gifted, or somehow superior to the rest of the world.  It isn't because we are "free".

Is it possible to have the advantages of colonialism without the moral cost?  Would you be willing to live in a world where all that oil did not flow to the US?  And what would you say to the billions now on the fringes of Empire?

Thanks for all the fish!  (Hitchhiker's Guide)

Power to the People?

The Draft issue has raised its ugly head, yet again.  I was looking at old protest footage from the early 70s with an audio track of Lennon’s “Power to the People”.  Inspiring.   Compare that time with our time today.

The left was the spearhead the 60’s movement.  When Abbie Hoffman organized youth rallies to burn their draft cards, they were chanting phrases like “hell no, we won’t go”.  The protest wasn’t against the draft, per se; it was against the war and the military industrial complex. 

In the early 80s after the LP collapsed under the weight of debt from the Clark/Koch campaign, my college friends in Delaware decided to keep building the “movement.”  We came across an anti-draft pamphlet written by Jeffrey Hummel (compatriot of Murray Rothbard), made a new cover with the SLS logo on it (Students for a Libertarian Society… a play on the 60’s “SDS” anti-draft movement), and photocopied hundreds on a school copier and passed them out all over the U of D campus.

Thinking back, the argument we put out wasn’t “hell no, we won’t go”, but that “the draft violates the 13^th Amendment”.  We held a few small rallies against Reagan’s draft registration.  We argued that the draft, as all compulsory service, was the foundation for “statism”, blah blah, blah—you get the picture.

Point is that the left burned draft cards in protest to the war and the military industrial complex, and modern C4L rallies of Ron Paul scream to our youth about the Constitution and the merits of Anarchy.  So does the entire right wing, when it suits them.

The radical left was always for a draft—and not just for military service.  It is seen as a way to make military service “fair” and not just for poor people.  It is the citizen army concept that pre-dates Das Kapital by 2000 years.  Nixon took away their thunder by declaring the AVF, All-Volunteer Force, which serves the military industrial complex just fine.

A recent email by Alan Grayson, whom I consider a true patriot, outlines the logic of the radical left and causes me to question their vision.  Yes, it makes sense that 2 trillion spent on wars could fund a new CCC in all its modern, multi-branded forms.  However, taking the model of Bureaucracy to its logical conclusion, in my opinion, is no better vision than that of the neo-libertarian anarchists of today.

I remain against compulsory service, and I remain against any draft.  But more importantly, I remain against the wars and the military industrial complex that has blighted our planet and enslaved our people.  Government should protect the people.  The only “national interest” is the people under protection of our sovereignty, not the private ventures of capital and ambition.

As with Ron Paul, I’ll go so far with Alan Grayson to include stopping the wars and ending the military industrial complex.  I’ll even go further and praise Grayson for his stand on the public option and for single-payer Medicare for all.  But recruiting 2 million workers for the Peace Corp, and the This Corp and That Corp, all those new uniforms!  Sorry, too “Starship Troopers” for me.

You want to bring jobs back to the US?  Raise tariffs to 35%.  Bam; done.

You want alternative energy to thrive?  It would happen naturally as America was cut off from oil.  After all, that’s what the wars are really about, aren’t they?  Add our military budget to our energy consumption and you have a good idea what oil is REALLY costing America.

Yes, I want fairness in the current income tax code.  Instead of “tax credits” which benefit the wealthy and force middle class investment into narrow directions such as “real estate” or “education”, a single deduction of $40,000 for all citizens would be much more “fair”, with a linear rate after that.  Thus, a person making $50,000 would pay x% of $10,000.  No write-offs for depreciation or tax havens.

Simple and fair.  And I haven’t discussed the Currency issue yet J

Yes, I’m with Grayson on the Banks issue too.  I’d like to be on Ron Paul’s side, since I would also like to “end the fed”, but any serious look at his proposals to do so are just wrong, wrong, wrong.  Grayson wants to regulate the banks, and I’d like nothing more than to haul their CEO’s into public court, committee hearings be damned!

Then again, Alan Grayson isn’t campaigning on every college campus in America.  Ron Paul is.  Who will lead the rebellion of America?  Whose policies will rise to the top?

Look around and see.  Look at the Middle East today, look at the Mediterranean Basin, from Algeria to Israel to Greece to Spain.  Look at Indonesia, and South America, Mexico.  Look at what corporate and banking interests have done to our world.

Egypt still has no democracy as of this writing.  It is being run by a junta, financed by outside “national interests”.  The people rise against corruption and are left with what?  Somalia?  The very Libertopia that Ron Paul ultimately advocates?  It is that world, not Grayson's, that will come to pass over America and across the Earth.

Unless we stop them, here at the heart of darkness, America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_CmkfdPQyg