百家争鸣
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[US Constitution revolution for real democracy]
郭国汀律师专栏
·不是中国政府而是中共暴政丧尽天良!不但温家宝而且胡锦涛皆乃政治精神重症患者!
·中国共产党早已病入膏肓无可救药!
·杜绝三鹿毒奶粉事件的三项原则
·郭国汀律师系统批判中共极权专制暴政论文目录
·郭国汀中共政权已经彻底流氓化
·中共是极端残暴下流无耻的流氓暴政 郭国汀
·怀念当代中国最高贵的人——杨天水/张林
·关于中共政权合法性及专制暴政与人种信仰关系的论战 郭国汀
·南郭/推翻颠覆中共流氓暴政有功无罪!
·面对中共流氓暴政全体中国人应当做什么?
·面对十八层地狱,我的真情告白
·我的退党(社)、团、队声明
·从中共控制媒体看中共政权的脆弱
·关于加国公民起诉江泽民罗干李清王茂林案的宣誓证词(英文)
·中共极力扶持缅甸军事专制政府及苏丹专制暴政
·请胡锦涛立即停止疯狂攻击郭国汀律师的电脑
·中共专制暴政恶贯满盈
·申曦(曾节明):剥胡锦涛的画皮
·申曦(曾节明):胡锦涛其人其事
·申曦(曾节明):胡锦涛虚伪狡诈邪恶凶残阴险的真面目
·申曦(曾节明):胡锦涛的伪善与病态人格
·申曦(曾节明):盖棺认定胡氏中共暴政
·申曦(曾节明):江泽民的心病
·申曦(曾节明):邓小平罪孽深重
***(35)中国政治体制批判
·中共政权始终是一个非法政权 郭国汀
·郭国汀律师批判极权专制政治司法教育体制主张自由人权宪政民主文章目录
·郭国汀律师政论时评目录
·中国反抗专制暴政的先驱者与英雄
·郭国汀与横河谈中共暴政阉割国人灵魂使警察成为恶魔
·孙文广、程晓农、郭国汀谈共产党的公务员非法歧视政策
·划时代的审判,创造历史的壮举
·恶法不除,国无宁日
·致加拿大国会的公开函
·中共已是末日疯狂/郭国汀
·三权分立的哲学基础
·虚伪是极权专制的必然付产品-------南郭与中律网友们的对话
·汝竟敢骂共党骂毛泽东!
***(36)中共司法体制批判
·从人权律师的遭遇析中国人权的实际情况
·郭律师评价中国律师诉讼及司法体制现状
·中共专制暴政下为什么冤假错案堆积如山?
·中共勞教制度是人類歷史上最野蠻的制度
·马亚莲案与废除劳教制度
·郭國汀談中共勞教制度下的性酷刑
·郭國汀談萬名公民提出廢除勞教制度建立叻ㄐ袨槌C治法
·郭国汀:违宪、违法
·郭国汀律师谈中国司法现状
·郭国汀称司法黑社会化免死承诺难保赖昌星的命
·为赖昌星遗返案我的宣誓证词
·中华全国律师协会的实质----被阉割与自宫
·郭国汀 司法公正的前提条件
***中共专制暴政是国人一切深重苦难的总根源
·人权律师郭国汀称中共制造法拉盛事件旨在嫁祸抹黑法轮功以转移公众视线
·郭国汀 纽约时报报导死难学生亲属周月悼念地震中无辜牺牲的亲人
·美国顶级地震专家称四川地震有可能未能被预测到
·谁之罪?
·中共专制暴政的罪孽学校跨塌致数千名学生死灭最新统计
·一篇被全球英文博客转载最多的四川地震实况报导
·郭国汀百无一用是中国律师
·我愿意收养一个为救人而牺牲的教师或母亲的遗孤
·中国人持继追问为何众多学校震成碎片废墟? 被全球英文网站转载最多的地震专文
***美国2008年总统大选南郭点评系列
·朗保罗--美国2008年大选最雄劲的黑马
·美国大选最新民意进展分析——美国2008年总统大选南郭点评系列之二
·美国2008年大选程序正义与演讲精华
·欧巴马的通往白宫之旅
·前国务卿鮑威尔支持欧巴马
·麦肯总统候选人的基本政策主张
***(42)中国民主运动研究
· 自由宪政民主运动与中共暴政的决战主战场何在?
·国人应当认清中共政权的极权专制流氓犯罪本质
·真正觉醒后英勇的你我他才是决定中国前途和命运的基本力量
·是谁制造了大陆中国的“暴戾之气的泛滥”?
·我为何对中共极权暴政及胡锦涛没有仇恨维有鄙视?
·是共特黑而非民运黑
·我所了解的政治新星曾节明
· 南郭点评陈子明社会运动与政治演练
· 序《我的两个中国 --一个六四天安门学生反革命的实录》
·时代的最强音:“六四”屠城二十一周年口号
· 警惕共匪假冒民运人士故意毁损民运声誉—答人民思想家
·论颠覆国家政权罪的律师辩护
·郭律师点评杨建立博士论三个中国
·退出自由中国论坛的公开声明
·陈尔晋与张国堂之争的性质
·我的几个基本观点答张国堂先生公开信
·中国民运战略研究
·中国民运当前面临问题与对策研究
·郭国汀加入民主中国阵线的公开声明
·论公推中国民运政治领袖的必要性
·论公推自荐公选民运政治精神领袖的紧迫性
·中国民主运动领袖论?答方文武先生
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
US Constitution revolution for real democracy

US Constitution revolution for real democracy
   By Tom Crumpacker Noted by Thomasgguo
   Pending a radical change to the US Constitution progressives can forget genuine democracy, says Tom Crumpacker. Meanwhile commercial oligarchy(government by a small group of people, often for their own interests ) will continue to promote raw power rather than rule of law in a parliamentary system outwith the control of ordinary people

   Too many US progressives seem to accept the myth of United States democracy. We hear and read of all kinds of change strategies and tactics, which have one thing in common: a belief that winning elections by progressive candidates will solve our problems. But until we have a real democracy this won't happen, and we should have learned this sometime in the last 50 years. Without real democracy, we cannot peacefully or successfully address the calamitous(a sudden terrible event causing great loss and suffering ) problems which face us, such as economic crisis, war, unilateralism, authoritarianism, corporatism, environmental destruction, loss of privacy and liberty, discrimination, poverty, wage, health care, education, etc. In society these crucial issues are addressed by laws, which derive from political power. With no real democracy, electoral strategies and complaints about issues are just so much hot air. What US progressives have in common, whatever their specific issue or interest, is a desperate(ready for any wild act and not caring about danger because of loss of hope :suffering extreme need, anxiety or loss of hope; full of risk or danger; done as a last attempt and with little hope of success; extremely difficult and dangerous grave) need for democracy.
   Thomas Jefferson [1743-1826] once predicted(to see or describe a future happening in advance as a result of knowledge.) that every generation would need its revolution. Politically speaking, we seem to be on the verge of entering a new dark age, where relations between people, classes, groups, governments and nations depend on raw power rather than the rule of law. Our national political system was structured 217 years ago by white, male property owners in what was then thought to become an essentially agricultural and mercantile society based in small communities and states. Limited powers were granted to a federal government of three separate branches.
   Since then, enormous technological, economic, scientific, geographic, demographic (statistical study of human population) and other factors have completely altered the power relationships then contemplated. Nevertheless, we are still attempting to operate with what is essentially the original structure. The only basic changes we've made have been extending the vote to the propertyless, racial minorities and women, and centralizing the public funding and decision-making power at the federal level.
   Although our rulers frequently say that we have a democracy and seek to impose our institutions on others, the only accurate words to describe our system as it now functions are commercial oligarchy(government by a small group of people for their own interests ) or plutocracy(a ruling class of wealthy people). The core of the historic idea of democracy is the possibility of collective decision-making about collective action for a common good. The reason humans have been trying to achieve this vision at least since the days of ancient Athens has to do with freedom. To the extent people can participate in the important decisions which affect their lives, personally or by true representation, the decisions become theirs, they implement them, and society's need for coercion diminishes.
   The United States was not originally intended to be a democracy (except for one branch of the legislature). Populism(a person who claims to believe in the wisdom and judgment of ordinary people) was feared by those who set up our government. It was first called a republic, and, like Rome and all the rest, has now morphed into empire. Our important decision-making is done by a power elite(a group that is of higher level or rank) consisting of big business-corporate, military and political, as described by C. Wright Mills in his 1960 essay "The Power Élite." By funding the politicians and mass media, our élites acquire the power to use them to obtain public acquiescence in the societal decisions they make privately.
   The problem is that most of our national politicians are not representing the public interest (common good); rather they are representing the powerful private interests which fund them, on the theory that some of the benefits will “trickle down” to the people. They are pursuing self-interest, seeking to retain their offices which bring them wealth and power – as encouraged by our dominant “laissez faire” ideology. In a democracy people can protect themselves by forcing the politicians to set the societal rules which govern their relations.
   Our rulers seek to justify our “interest based” system by calling it pluralist. In this type of system, where advertising in the media is crucial, economic power produces political power, political power produces economic power, and the role of the people disappears. The purpose of a political system is to allow for an appropriate degree of social change within an appropriate degree of stability. Today, progressive change in and within our system has become impossible. Our mass consumer society, which binds us together not by our values but by enmeshing(to catch in a net) us in a net of commercial relations, has become an overwhelming(very large; too great to oppose) depoliticizing force.
   The seats in our House of Representatives (our “people's house”) have become virtual lifetime appointments, encouraging allegiance(loyalty, faith , and dutiful support to a leader, county, idea) to private rather than public interests. David Brower has called it the House of Lords. Our Congress has delegated its legislative authority to an imperial presidency. About half of eligible Americans no longer participate in national elections. Bush, who was elected by 27% of the eligibles, says he represents those who agree with him. With a winner-take-all electoral system, only two parties are possible at the national and state levels. They have morphed into one two-pronged party purporting to help special interests and status groups. The growth of alternative, people based parties founded on values has been made impossible by entrenched laws, impossibility of funding and exclusion from the mass media and public debate.
   There are plenty(a large quantity or number) of good ideas out there which need to be explored publicly and considered in a revision of our Constitution. Such as (1) a parliamentary system with proportional representation, where people could find participation and representation by voting their values; (2) public control of, or at least significant input in, the broadcast media (the airwaves are public); (3) selective decentralization of political and economic units so that real democracy could function, such as return to the original federation idea and further; (4) elimination of campaign expenditures, replacement with public funding or at least anonymous(done or made by someone whose name is not know or stated), limited contributions; (4) limitation of size, function and activities of corporations, return to public control (originally they were public institutions); (5) elimination of our Senate; (6) elimination of gerrymandering, re-draw House districts based on population and geographical affinity only; (7) term limits; (8) elimination of Electoral College; (9) elimination of lobbying - where expertise is necessary, replace with public commissions; (10) provision for accountability and recall of representatives; (11) articulation of implied right of privacy in Bill of Rights; (12) clarification of Congress's responsibility to declare war, military for national defense only.
   Many more political reforms are needed and they all have their benefits and drawbacks(difficulty or disadvantage). The point I am trying to make is not which are appropriate; rather, I think it is now too late to work through the system. The system cannot be fixed by working through it because it is not functioning. It is no longer in the people's control. If we keep trying, we are wasting our precious time, and the other problems like war, ecological(the scientific study of the pattern of relations of plants, animals, and people to each other and to their surroundings) disaster, economic crisis, might do us in first.

[下一页]

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场