Dave,

I saw you correct yourself, but I have NEVER made the mistake (frequently made by neo-cons and tea-baggers) of confusing “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” as part of the Constitution.

As admirable as the Declaration of Independence is, it has no force of Law.  Only the Constitution does.  While it does not explicitly and elegantly state that principle, the 9th Amendment does state:
“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

This may be the most ignored Amendment ever.  It states a principle but has no means of testing or enforcing which rights are denied or disparaged.

The 10th Amendment, has been interpreted to say that if it isn’t explicitly federal, it’s the states’ power, but it doesn’t say that.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

See, those last 4 words have been erased by States’ Righters since the Ante-Bellum and subsumed into the rights of the States—such as the right to allow slavery or, today, the right to unconstitutionally demand proof of citizenship and residency in Arizona, which violates the last 4 words.

But those, too, are “unalienable rights”.

Notice, too, that Jefferson replaced “God” with “their Creator” in acknowledgment that there are many, many faiths, and even non-faiths and that “Creator” is loose enough to not be exactly what the individual wants to define it as.

Conceptually, I like the Libertarian idea that we should live by meritocracy and self-responsibility.  But that denies 100,000 years of human behavior. There have always been warlords, brigands, thugs, and “Mafiosi” and frequently they were the leaders. The history of England until Elizabeth I is nothing but battles between warlords.

Sad as it is, predator and prey has been the state of humans dealing with each other since we first evolved.  The strongest take what they want and take the fruits of others’ labor.

So people form coalitions to protect themselves—in unity is strength.  But what happens? Within those coalitions and communities the same thugs arise and become the leaders and, usually, the warlords.  It doesn’t matter if we look at the battles in Mesopotamia 4,000 years ago, the Chinese Warring States period 2,500 years ago, the British throne battles from 800 to 1600, or the warlords battling today in Congo over natural resources.

And the warlords always capitalize on two things: Fear and ethnic pride….“Watch out for the ‘other’. Only I can protect you.  And you are so much better than the ‘other’”  Sound familiar?

And in American we have this—it’s called the “Tea Party”, a thuggish, illiterate version of the neo-cons, who said the same thing and very nearly led us to the warlord fascist state they desire—and we STILL teeter on the brink.

On the one hand we have the Dems who coyly have us dancing on that brink.  On the other, the GOPers who tell us that’s Heaven when in reality it’s Hell.

Me? I’d rather we kept dancing than plunge.

Anarcissie,

It may come as no surprise to you if I were to state that my community is totally different than your community, and my experiences are totally different than your experiences.

I think that most who gravitate to the collective (or polis if you wish) do so out of fear and weakness.  They are robbed of their individuality, or will, and unconsciously replace it with the collective will, which is in fact a collection of the lies they have been fed by those whose purpose is to corral them long enough to suck the life out of them.

Subconsciously, however, they understand what has happened to them.  Like an addict, they cannot seem to consciously address the reality of their problem.  They exhibit symptoms and behaviors similar to many of the posters here on TD.  Irritability, hatred, paranoia and insecurity are the most predominant.  They also exhibit an intense need to compare how many “goodies” they have relative to others, and they seriously hate those who have more. 

Now why would a freedom loving, reasonably intelligent, secure individual want to hang around with a group like that, when it is not really that hard to find other freedom loving, secure individuals to hang out with, when it comes time to hang out?

I don’t hate the weak and insecure.  I avoid them, but not out of hate or fear, as is commonly inferred.  I am more than willing to show them how to change their condition if they are really interested.  It is not that hard to change.

But the bloodsuckers have them pretty well bamboozled and in a severe state of dependency, so it is hard to pry them loose.  And since they do not consciously admit their problem, it is hard to talk to them about it.  It’s a pity, really, because their vampires have them convinced that people like me are their enemy.

So I try not to get too involved.  As I have stated earlier, as a sovereign individual with God-given unalienable rights, I have absolutely no need for these bloodsucking governments and that whole collective left/right political and economic slavery scene.  I am not a member of that community.

But I would not mind whatsoever if a more freedom loving, God-friendlier, group of bloodsuckers were in power.  It could make my life a tiny bit easier. But I am not going to lose any sleep over it.  Take no thought for the morrow, as they say.

There are millions like me, but not too many on these types of forums.  They are sustained elsewhere.  Besides, we all know that reading this stuff is like eating bad food.  Eventually it has to ruin your health.  I have to take regular breaks.

DaveZx3, July 16 at 2:46 pm:

‘... If I were to give Aristotle any credit for his above statement, it would be to say that man is a political animal by nature, but I would add that this is because he is also a needy son-of-a-bitch by nature, and politics is a large part of the process by which men attempt to satisfy their needs.’

Human beings are highly social animals.  Individuals can sometimes survive for several years in total isolation, but as such they can’t reproduce successfully; the minimal size of a band or troop which is going to survive seems to be a few dozen.  There is also some question as to whether isolated individuals are fully human, since they lose the use of language and human culture without any evidence that anything replaces them.

Unfortunately for the antisocial, then, human beings seem to need one another, like it or not, and to be more or less bound to community, if not a particular community.  In fact, the community seems to be a sort of organism—the polis.  That being the case, the issue of whose will shall prevail in the community becomes an important question, which we call “politics”.  The community may be totalitarian, anarchic, or something in between, but it’s going to be an issue because humans are willful animals and they habitually attempt to impose their wills on one another.

I don’t know about the gods, but Aristotle was wrong about the beasts; many species, especially the mammals, are similarly bound to community.  Perhaps some of them have similar problems.

This is pretty abstract for a discussion about the upcoming elections, though.

By Jason_can_read, July 16 at 2:55 pm #

“I really liked what you had to say about politics in general.  What you have to say about one ideology inevitably enslaving another is true enough in any given society.  However, what I find confusing is what you stand for.  Are you an anarchist?  I am just curious as the tone of your comment suggests that you are, in my opinion.  I mean…not that there is anything wrong with that; but if so, say so”

I stand for individual freedom.  Other than that, I hate to have to be pinned down to an ideaology, as that in itself is antithesis to freedom.  There is a lot of freedom in anarchy, but most could not live with no external direction.  Also, I think a state of anarchy would result in fear and an excuse to call for excessive government intervention and ultimate tyrany.

Regarding different types of government, I would have to say that some forms do inherently allow for more personal freedom than others, but it is not good to generalize.  A democratically elected official can become a tyrant, and a king can be a benevolent dictator.  Freedom is a relative thing, and unless you have something to compare to, it is easy to be deluded that you are in a state of freedom or a state of bondage. 

It is easy for me, because I hold those words from the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights” to be my guiding light.

Since my rights come from my creator, I am not obliged to answer to any man for them.  In other words, I am a sovereign individual, and not inherently subject to the rule of any man or government, except for any man or government to whom I may agree to become contracted to or ruled by.  IE:  I agree to be governed by and subject to the laws of the United States through my free sovereign will to do so. 

But as the Declaration states, once the government becomes oppressive, it is an obligation of the citizenry to abolish that government.  Not the form of government (the Constitution), but the individuals who make up the government.  That is why the US is a Constitutional Republic, and not a democracy.

Democracy is a very fickle form of government, as the 51% can not only vote themselves benefits, but they can extract those benefits from the 49%.  Democracy in its raw form, is simply tyranny by the majority.

But I am not going to judge different forms of government.  As I said, freedom is in the eyes of the beholder, and people have the ability to maintain minimum levels of happiness even in slavery.  It is for no man to judge but he who is subjected to it.

But always remember, politics is not about right and left or republican and democrat or capitalism and communism.  Politics is all about FREEDOM and SLAVERY.  Judge all things by whether it makes you a little more free or a little less free.

“I define freedom as “not being a member”...I only ask one thing from my government, and that is to be left alone….I do not need your governments…I would rather eat the bark off of trees than be a member of somebody’s constituency.”

Sorry. My mistake. I don’t know how I could have possibly come to that conclusion.

By Peetawonkus, July 16 at 12:28 pm #

Aritstotle was not without fault, and that statement was one of his most ridiculous.  I am sure that is why most people leave out the last part of that quote, because it is absurd in its premise.

Also absurd is your misreading of my post.  You asked, “If you don’t need government or anything or anybody else, which one are you?”

If you can point out where I inferred I was not in need of anything, including government, please show me.  My actual statement was that I needed government to protect my liberty only, but beyond that, I made no comment regarding anything or anybodey else whom I may or may not need.

If I were to give Aristotle any credit for his above statement, it would be to say that man is a political animal by nature, but I would add that this is because he is also a needy son-of-a-bitch by nature, and politics is a large part of the process by which men attempt to satisfy their needs.

To DaveZx3—
The Aristotle quote everyone loves is “Man is by nature a political animal.” But they leave out the rest of the quote.

“Man is by nature a political animal. He who is not in the polis is either a beast or a God.”

If you don’t need government or anything or anybody else, which one are you?

What do we get for our votes & the taxes we pay? We get to watch congressmen & senators get free health insurance, raises, & pensions while they are wined & dined by lobbyists. It’s just that simple. We only exist to make someone else wealthy.

jean gerard, July 15 at 8:23 pm:

Could a liberal or progressive or labor party ever form in a Republican administration.  Never!

Or in a Democratic administration?  Maybe. ...’

I don’t see why a liberal or progressive or labor party could not form under any kind of administration, assuming someone wanted to form one.

I went outside and “stood barefoot in the grass and looked at the sky for 5 minutes.”

I’ll be voting for the lesser of two evils. Unless a miracle happens, and the lacking “baseline equality of resources” is overcome by a progressive third party.

The author has been an inspiring and powerful advocate of progressive causes. Along with standing barefoot in the grass and looking at the sky, his advice has a strong influence on my voting decision. These two above motivations to vote make more sense to me than the advice of those who see rapid self destruction as the best option.

Let the Republicans win. Americans need to suffer more, not less. Then perhaps they’ll wake up to the ugly truths about our Nation and revolt. Until then, it will be business as usually no matter what party’s in control. Obama has made that very clear.

I cannot understand people who define the spectrum of politics as Republican/Democrat, or conservative/liberal or capitalist/communist.  The two poles of the spectrum of politics can only be defined as freedom on the one side and slavery on the other.  Until you start thinking in those terms, you will spend your whole life frustrated by politics, and a slave to its stupidity.

Republicsns and Democrats both enslave you;  conservatives and liberals both enslave you; and capitalists and communists both enslave you.  In any particular circumstance, you will see people enslaved at one level or another by all these institutions or ideaologies, because they need you as their constituent to give them their power.  Power is gained by the loyalty of a constituency.  Constituencies are provoked to loyalty by the creation of “enemies”.  The constituency hands power over to their “leaders” for the benefits they will receive, which are primarily protection from their “enemies” 

It is amazing to me how many individuals feel they will be better off if they are enslaved by one insitution or ideology rather than another.  In my estimation, slavery is slavery.  I have no enemies, because the very act of having any enemy is enslaving to a certain extent.  I try to have as little money and possesions as possible, as these are enslaving also.

I now refuse to be a constituent of any institution or ideaology.  I define freedom as “not being a member”.
 
I only ask one thing from my government, and that is to be left alone.  I will try to protect the Constitution of the United States because it has those words, “endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights”  and as long as these words are the law of the land, I will chose to live as an American citizen. 

But, beyond that,  leave me alone.  I do not need your governments, except for one thing, to protect those words.  Other than that, I would rather eat the bark off of trees than be a member of somebody’s constituency.

People have a right to be angry, as well as a right to remove a party from power that displeases them. The unfortunate thing is people obviously do not have the right to vote out the power structure. At this point in time voting has degraded to nothing more than a choice between pain and more pain, there is no winning. In Washington DC nothing changes except the color of their hats.

How can one teach an american, who is steeped in one of the narrowest todo, called politics, to stop thinking-talking ab Dems or Repubs.

An explanation reagarding a narrow look as opposed to taking longest and widest look, politics appears as the narrowest look possible.
The person who casts the widest and longest look appears the wisest.
Politics is mostly cunning and not wisdom!

I suggest that instead of naming a pol like biden, kerry a Dem, to call biden politico 1, kerry politico 2, cucinich politico 3, lieberman pol 4, kyl 5…

So just like apple 1 can be compared with apple 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, so can pol 1 with pols 2, 3, 4,k.

Dichotomizing congress people into Dems and Repubs renders many blind; precisely, why media and pols use the ruse.

Dichotomy only jars a mind into assesing that a Dem and a Repub are different and not that they are similar or even the same in salient matters.

In fact, pol 77 differs only very slightly from pol 201 and only in matters that matter litte or nothing to, say, a houseperson, hobo, indigenous person, miner, homeless person, student, et al.

But if one wld split asunder pols, it wld be better to split them in 10 or 20 categories instead of just two as it is s’mwhat awkward to split them in 500 sorts or species.

In lying, ?all 500 are similar or same. In making political—ând not real life—promises they are similar. In blaming, getting angry, avoidance to meet people, greed, fear of losing the lucre and glory, etcetc., they don’t differ; at least not to me! tnx

We only have two parties. Well, one and a half. The Corporate Party of Voldemort and the slightly nicer Corporate Party. Let’s call that one the Corporate Party of Snape. So when Americans get burned by one party they turn in rage and frustration to the only alternative they have. Which is like shooting yourself in the right foot and getting angry at the gun so to “get even” you shoot yourself in the left foot. Sure, as one poster here suggests, anybody is free to start a political party, if you don’t like your choices. Which is like saying anybody is free to marry a millionaire. It presumes a baseline equality of resources that, of course, do not exist.

If voters choose any Republicans in the upcoming election, they are assuring the continuation of politicians extending their middle finger at the public while extending more subsidies to business.

What possible incentive would Republicans have to start doing for the people rather than big business.

Many Republicans have been screwing the people for so many years and getting re-elected, including Boehner, McCain, and McConnell.

Think about it voters. If your dog bites you and you continue to tolerate it, why would he stop biting you.

Narcissie,
I am not an american. One cld vote for nader even tho he does not head a party! That’s not good news for me.
An org can be destroyed. A party ?never. It at times breaks in two,tho.

Green party wld be my choice as well. Then there is a socialist party in US.
European societies are much more egalitarian [in earnigs, especially] than US, because each euro land has at least two widely-diverging parties, but often even more. tnx

But the furious and frustrated electorate should be careful when they demand change in the upcoming midterm elections—because what they get may well be very different from what they actually want.

In their great wisdom, much of the screwed-over American public is going to vote Republican this November.  They will then get the return of Bush/Cheney (aka Super Obama Treatment). Bush/Cheney will fall on them like the famous ton of bricks and even then these paragons of intelligence will wonder what the hell happened.

No matter what anyone says, the Presidency and the Congress are Democratic because “—we the people—” made it that way.  Were we betrayed—hell yes!! But, is that any reason to “spite vote” away the small political foothold we’ve established?

    Both the Democratic and the Fascist Party are going to put “ringers” in the game and obfuscate like hell. That’s politics. Another eight years of Fascist rule will close the coffin lid on Democracy.

    It is the intent of both the corrupt little organizations, and the job of the propagandist MSM to convince you that you’re a powerless and hopeless slug. @#$% THEM!! I say, hold the edge we have ( it shakes ‘em when we do it), take OLD MAN T’s advice, begin serious cultural self re-evaluation, accept that change is slow, and become the dangerous political animals we know we are.

      My first suggestion is that you give yourself five minutes, stand barefoot on the Earth, take a deep breath, look at the sky, and then make sure you’re registered to VOTE!!

Mr. Conasons point is well taken. IT can get a lot worse FAST. In my mind, most of the “spite vote” spin springs from corporate MSM talking heads and Republican thugs. Indeed, the American national psyche has been so bruised, manipulated and controlled, the hubristic political moral cripples of the goose stepping Right, for the benefit of austerity, are offering us the opportunity, to cut out the middle men, and screw ourselves.

    Americans have legitimate cause for anger. President O deserves some of it. But, the MSM spinners remember, are just that. They deny access to substantive political dialogue, and apply the emotional reflex hammer for the kneejerks. The real rage you feel, springs from their treating you like an idiot child, while they bed down with the crooks looting your life.

    And, by the way, what’s with all the T.V. Aussie and Limey pundits who’ve suddenly appeared to talk down their twangy little noses to us? Is that Rupert M. I smell in the wings?

    I enjoy the posts and articles here. They often voice, clarify and sound out situations, and point me toward some informative doors. The journalists here at TRUTHDIG do give us some good articles. I know I rant a little sometimes,(hope you forgive me), but I’ve seen too many good lives destroyed to swallow any more of my rage. This election is serious. I do hope we can keep moving forward. If the Fascists again gain total control, we are lost! HOLD THE LINE!!

Here are some factors that could lead to the upcoming elections turning out well for Repugs.  I am in the progressive, may not vote, camp for these reasons.

Obama campaign that was wildly overpromising and deceitful.

Rightfully disgusted progressives abandoning corrupt corporatist Dems/POTUS. Considerable non voting/refusal to vote for the “lesser of 2 evils” (i.e. a crap versus vomit election).

A group of stupified, astroturfed Tea Party robots that will enthusiastically vote for elitist/corportist Repug agenda.

“But the furious and frustrated electorate should be careful when they demand change in the upcoming midterm elections—because what they get may well be very different from what they actually want.”

This could have been a direct quote from the McCain campaign two years ago. And how true it turned out to be.

balkas, July 15 at 9:55 am:

‘I agree,
Lower classes need own party that wld stand in opposition to the two plutocratic parties. ...’

So where is it?

There is nothing to stop people from forming new parties.  But if no one actually wants to do it, it’s not going to happen.

“A Change Election—in the Wrong Direction”

Someone tell Obama.
That is the problem—his “reforms”, are mere exercizes in tinkering around the edges when anything more than inflated false claims that no one buys. Obama has failed to reform anything—rather he continues the status quo which might be better to come tumbling down.
  If all the Democrats do is prop up an unsustainable system—preserving only the same class the Republicans serve, then maybe it is better that it crash rather than a slow spiral downward.

I agree,
Lower classes need own party that wld stand in opposition to the two plutocratic parties.
On all the salient issues, the two parties or two wings of one goose, agree with rich people!tnx

“A plague o’both their houses”, as Mercutio said in Romeo and Juliet.

Poll after poll shows the American people to be far
to the left of both Parties.  The glaring truth is
that neither Party represents the common wealth, and
both stand in the way of progress, just as they were
designed.
We lose to the degree that we cooperate with them,
listen to them, agree with them, fund them, vote for
them.

“No form of government, once in power, can be trusted
to limit its own ambition, to extend freedom and to
wither away. This means that it is up to the
citizenry, those outside of power, to engage in
permanent combat with the state, short of violent,
escalatory revolution, but beyond the gentility of
the ballot-box, to insure justice, freedom and well
being.”
(Howard Zinn)

The need for a 3rd, 4th, or 5th party has never been more evident than todays election process. In Oregon the Dimmos have now taken over the Independents, both parties are now one.
Simple answer is for voters to re-register in a party, made up or not, and have county clerk assign you to that party.
Go to town meetings and bitch like hell.

Conason: “But the furious and frustrated electorate should be careful when they demand change in the upcoming midterm elections—because what they get may well be very different from what they actually want…”

“Change” and “Hope” were sold to the gullible masses last time, and some of us observers wondered where the specifics were. That was the first clue. Joe Biden (never saw a drug law or a war he didn’t like) and Rahm Emanuel were the second and third. It was down the Matterhorn from there.

Did the people that bought the “Change” and “Hope” last time get anything close to what they thought they were buying?

Just today, thanks to David Sirota, we learn that: “Obama Hires Former Wellpoint Exec to Implement Health Care Law” (one of the lobbyists that literally wrote the law)
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/07/14-7

Does Mr. Conason remember President Obamas pledge to stop the revolving door b/w lobbyists and Congress? Apparently not.

People of the United States: The one thing the Elites fear the most is for us “lessers” to unite and find common ground. Because then these scam artists might just be exposed for the crooks, cheats and liars that they are.

“Neither a (R)epublican nor a (D)emocrat am I”