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
·诗论/郭国汀
·人性兽性的证明 南郭
·论嘲讽/南郭
·讽刺与赞美
·南郭点评芦笛
·竞技的由来与意义
·思想言论自由
·精神与物质同性
·自由的含义
·历史的价值
·战争与国家
·自学与真才实学
·欢迎批评批判
·其实我对法官充满了敬意!
·情由可言,难言之隐
·沉重的心!
·我为小点格格说句公道话
·堂堂正正做个真正的中国人!
·为自由为独立为思想的彻底解放大家努力呵!
·吾之专业乃出庭诉讼律师
·怒气
·最美丽的人
·南郭评论美人美言美语美文
·吾之教授梦在今天实现! 南郭
·南郭:我的遗嘱与托孤
·男子汉的眼泪/南郭
·性格决定命运/南郭
·文学感言/郭国汀
·郭国汀:春
·郭国汀:读实秋有感.
·郭国汀:理想.
·郭国汀:律师.
·郭国汀:作文.
·郭国汀:坚韧不拔
·郭国汀:兴趣.
·信函/南郭
·日记与书信/南郭
·性格/南郭
·天才,蠢才,笨蛋/南郭
·陈良宇是中共残酷政治斗争的牺牲品
·郭国汀 国人民族主义乃中共误导所致
·人民公社万岁?!--《辉煌的幻灭》读后感
·如何成为一名伟大的,优秀的法律人?网友评论
·如何成为一名对社会有用的人
·谁杀死了中国伟大的诗人杨春光?
·忆对我前半生影响至深的三位老师
·A Letter to a Chinese
·不敢讲真话的民族注定是受奴役遭天谴的软骨头的劣等种族
·This is no time to kowtow to China
·南郭初步定论宣昶玮
·自封上帝皇帝圣人者:狂妄无知之徒?!
·南郭点评宣昶玮自封紫薇圣人
·南郭点评张千帆教授论宪政
·愤怒出诗人,悲愤出伟诗
***(55)郭国汀律师专访
·世纪回眸(69)-专访郭国汀之一
·世纪回眸(70)-专访郭国汀律师之二
·郭国汀谈郭飞雄、力虹、陈树庆遭被捕
·法律人的历史使命---答《北大法律人》主编采访录
·郭国汀律师答亚洲周刊纪硕鸣采访实录
·希望之声专访:声援高智晟同时也是在为自己
·胡平章天亮郭国汀谈中华文化与道德重建
·希望之声专访郭国汀 中共是最大的犯罪利益集团
·中共已是末日黄昏----郭国汀声援杨在新律师
·希望之声专访郭国汀用法律手段揪出幕后凶手
·【专访】郭国汀从海事律师到人权律师的转变
·专访郭国汀:为女儿打破沉默
·郭国汀谴责中共对他全家迫害恐吓
·郭国汀律师谈中国司法现状
·人权律师郭国汀在加拿大谈六四
·加拿大华人举办烛光悼念纪念六四-著名人权律师郭国汀称退党运动具有重大意义 
·采访郭国汀律师:被逼离婚 战斗到底
·华盛顿邮报报导高智晟律师事件
·[专访]郭国汀律师:从刘金宝案谈开去
·希望之声专访郭国汀和盛雪
·大纪元专访郭国汀 中共垮台是必然的
·郭国汀谈高智晟律师的公开信
·中共的末日只是时间迟早的问题
·中华文化与道德重建
·【专访】郑恩宠律师郭国汀谈郑案内情
·【专访】辩护律师郭国汀谈清水君案
·郭国汀指雅虎遵守当地法律说无法律根据
·郭国汀触怒司法当局:中国律师维护社会正义风险大
·US lawmakers ask Beijing to reinstate law firm of rights activist
***国际透视
·北朝鲜疯狂发展核武器为哪般?
·中国强劳产品出口的罪孽
·郭国汀 中国人民的真正朋友加拿大总理斯蒂芬 哈柏
·只有抛弃马列毛实现法治自由民主21世纪才有可能属于中国
·华盛顿邮报详细报导陈光诚案判决情况
·中国是国际网络表达自由的头号敌人
·华盛顿邮报陈光诚案庭审报导Chinese Rights Activist Stands Trial After Police Detain Defense Team
·新闻检查最严厉的十个国家胡锦涛称要向北朝鲜和古巴学习政治!
·国际人权观察就赵长青狱中受虐致胡温公开函
·中国驻美使馆拒收立即释放师涛的国际呼吁书
·国际保护记者委员会哀悼吴湘湖记者
·BBC 英语新闻报导《冰点》被封事件
·国际保护记者委员会关注声援杨天水
[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