Thread: We're Stuck With Two Kinds of Democracies

We're Stuck With Two Kinds of Democracies
By James T. Moore on Jan 09, 07

Nobody, especially this writer, should have to tell you that we’re sitting ducks with our “traditional” kind of democracy. Traditional, because that’s how most Americans (including most politicians) think of democracy. You know, the kind of democracy that’s supposed to keep America free; the kind that Bush & Co, are desperately trying to impose on the rest of the world, whether they like it or not.

I’ve written about “traditional” democracy many times in many media. I’ve tried to explain how our Founding Fathers abhorred the concept of democratic rule, and after much study and investigation, were determined to make this new nation a Republic. Then I described how a Republic gradually becomes a Democracy, and from there sinks into chaos and tyranny


What our founders learned from ancient history was that a Republic is a government ruled by Law, whereas a Democracy is a government ruled by Man. And that sounds so good that America was sucked into it. We gradually dumped the Republic our founders gave us and took on the more “equitable” mantle of a Democracy, or majority rule. Which literally means that if enough people vote to share in your wealth, or take from you what you own, or desecrate the flag, or dumb down a school’s curriculum, or give up our freedom for “security” you have to go along because that’s what the “majority” wants.


Which now makes you the minority!


In a Republic, however, the rule of Law prevents this kind of plunder by legislation, and enforces the concept of REAL freedom: giving you and me an opportunity to keep what we have, and prevent other citizens from taking what they want.


But today we are literally stuck in two kinds of democracy. I call the second one a Blowaway Democracy because it allows politicians, on one hand, to extol the so-called virtues of majority rule, but “blows it away” (ignores the majority) when it opposes any of the administration’s decisions or actions.


The Blowaway Democracy was never more evident than in what this administration is doing (or isn’t doing) about illegal aliens, and the war in Iraq. As of this date, the vast majority of Americans are insisting that something be done about stopping the rushing tide of Mexicans illegally sneaking into this country. President Bush has ignored the majority of American people by doing nothing about securing any of our borders. The fact is, he has encouraged the rape of this nation by enabling illegal families to get social security and other entitlements; and to become American citizens after a few weeks, whereas it takes legal immigrants several years to gain citizenship.


A large majority of Americans are opposed to the sovereign-killing North American Union: three countries tied together by a multi-lane superhighway running through America’s midsection and joining us up with Mexico and Canada to make ONE nation with ONE currency. This non-stop roadway system will be a boon for every foreigner, drug dealer, “wanted” character and indigent between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.


Bush has already signed off on the North American Union. By snubbing the wishes of the majority of Americans, he has secretly executed a near perfect, hypocritical example of Blowaway Democracy.


But the quintessential example of this faux democracy concerns Iraq, and is taking place even as we speak. In the face of a huge majority of Americans (70% to be exact) who want no more troops sent to Iraq, Bush will shortly unveil his new war plan for this beleaguered country, which is said to include up to 20,000 more troops--- in spite of the fact that some top military leaders claim there is no military solution to the problems in Iraq.


As wrong as it is, in a democracy, which Bush keeps pushing down peoples’ throats, the majority rules, yet here is our ego-driving, soft-headed commander-in-chief reneging on the concept of democracy to further his own warped agenda, and giving the majority of American people everything they DON’T want.


Giving up our Republic for a Democracy was bad enough. But it is painfully apparent that when this President promotes democracy throughout the world, then “blows it away” when it gets in the way of his dictatorial agenda, one has to wonder how this guy manages to look at himself in the mirror every morning.

ω ω ω ω ω ω ω ω

By James T. Moore on Jan 09, 07 | Email | Profile Permalink

http://newsbyus.com/more.php?id=6706_0_1_0_M

I'll probably make some people angry with this commentary, but that's not my intent.

The greatest success of those who wished to subvert our Republic was convincing us, through our higher education indoctrination machine, that this is not or was not founded as a Christian nation. People were convinced that casting off the mantle of religion was a noble pursuit, but they failed to realize the consequences of their actions.

First off, is this meant to be a Christian nation? Are the Christian precepts of ethics and morality essential to its existence as a free republic of laws?

In order for any republic to exist, there must first be a rigid moral and legal code that binds its citizens. If that code becomes subjective or subject to democratic vote, then one can scarcely describe that code as rigid, and indeed it will become less and less rigid until it no longer exists. The reason that the code must remain rigid is so that there is a uniform idea of justice. People will obey laws they deem to be just and will more often than not disregard and fail to enforce laws they deem to be unjust. Once faith is lost in the rule of law, the elite may begin to manipulate law for their own benefit. So you end up with a lower class that has no respect for the law and an elite that uses the law as a tool for personal enrichment and power. Sound familiar?

In answer to the question of whether this nation was founded as a Christian nation, let's put aside the revisionist claims of modern researchers (who are frequently given a result and then sent out to find some facts they can claim to support that result) and see what the court has said:

By our form of government, the Christian religion is the established religion and all denominations of Christian are placed upon the same equal footing. - U.S. Supreme Court 1796 (Ruggles v. Winemiller)

Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian. - U.S. Supreme Court 1892 (Church of Holy Trinity v. U.S.)

Why may not the Bible and especially the New Testament, be read and taught as a divine revelation in the schools? Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the New Testament? - U.S. Supreme Court 1844 (Vidal v. Girard)

What ever strikes at the root of Christianity tends manifestly to the dissolution of civil government. - U.S. Supreme Court 1811 (People v. Ruggles)

I'll bet you didn't learn about any of those decisions in your history classes!

So clearly our nation's chief jurists did not historically agree with the idea that this was a secular nation or that Christian principles were not essential to the preservation of our form of government.

What did the founding fathers have to say on the subject? The truth is that they had far more to say than could possibly be transmitted in this format, but I will provide a representative sampling, beginning with quotes from Thomas Jefferson that demonstrate the falsity of the claim that he was no Christian:

"My views...are the result of a lifetime of inquiry and reflection, and very different from the anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruptions of Christianity I am, indeed, opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished any one to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others..." - Thomas Jefferson, 1803

"The Bible is the cornerstone of liberty. A student's perusal of the sacred volume will make him a better citizen, a better father, a better husband." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis-a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His justice cannot sleep forever." - Thomas Jefferson

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion...Our constitution was made only for a moral and religion people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future of all of our political institutions upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." - James Madison

"Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars." - George Washington (Farewell Address)

"Our country was founded on the Gosple of Jesus Christ." -Patrick Henry

"The longer I live the more convinced I become that God governs in the affairs of men. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance." -Benjamin Franklin

"While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but once they lose their virtue they will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader." -Samuel Adams

"The religion which has introduced civil liberty, is the religion of Christ and His apostles, which enjoins humility, piety, and benevolence; which acknowledges in every person a brother, or a sister, and a citizen with equal rights. This is genuine Christianity, and to this we owe our free constitutions of government." - Noah Webster

"Every civil government is based upon some religion or philosophy of life. Education in a nation will propagate the religion of that nation. In America, the foundational religion was Christianity. And it was sown in the hearts of Americans through the home and private and public schools for centuries. Our liberty, growth, and prosperity were the result of a Biblical philosophy of life. Our continued freedom and success is dependent on our educating the youth of America in the principles of Christianity." - Noah Webster

"The Bible is the rock on which our Republic rests." - Andrew Jackson

I believe I have clearly demonstrated that any argument that this was not founded as a Christian nation or that those who founded this nation did not believe that the preservation of Christian principles as the foundation of government was essential to the proper functioning of government is nothing more than revisionism. But just as the pigs gradually rewrote the commandments in Orwell's Animal Farm, knowing full well that the other animals would eventually forget what their original text and intent had been, so have the power elite in this country attempted to rewrite history in order to rob us of the most essential element to the preservation of a free republic. Worse yet, they have succeeded in indoctrinating the masses into the belief that it is a virtuous act to cast aside the cornerstone of this republic.

Now, for those atheists, agnostics, or other non-Christians reading along, what stake do you have in the preservation of Christianity as an operating principle of government? Well, there must be some fundamental code, some foundation stone that can be the reference point for our laws and statutes. What better foundation is there than Christianity? After all, the Christian faith revealed by the Bible is probably the most tolerant of all the major faiths, and in fact the founding fathers embraced those of other faiths, including Judaism and Islam, specifically. Christianity is a faith based upon a combination of personal accountability and forgiveness. It treasures truth and justice. As a matter of fact, every virtue hailed as a groundbreaking triumph of our new form of government was in fact rooted firmly in Christian ethics.

More importantly, for those non-Christians who are concerned about their "rights," I ask, what source do you imagine exists for those rights? Have you done any research into the concept of rights?

Our system of rights is often tied to the system of liberties in ancient Rome by modern educators, but nothing could be further from the truth. Liberties and rights and not the same thing. Under the rule of Rome, liberties were conferred by the state. Every Roman had a right to enjoy the liberties conferred, but those liberties themselves were as impermanent as the whim of the emperor. That which is conferred by the state may be rescinded by the state.

Later attempts at securing rights appealed to a higher power than the state. The Magna Carta, for example, sought to place the power of the Church and the liberties granted by the faith above the power of the monarchy. This also resulted in impermanence, however, due to the often fickle nature of the European Church establishment and the capricious edicts of the Pope. The Magna Carta remains in force, but only as tiny fragments of the original, whith most of the rest having been rescinded.

But the founders of this nation took a step no one had previously taken. They placed the origin of our rights beyond the reach of any institution of man by having them conferred by God Himself. The European monarchs had claimed their power as having been granted by God, but in fact they wielded their power as a personal privilege with caprice and placed their own edicts over fundamental biblical truths. This new nation removed man from the equation. And while there was a process of determining what these rights were that had been conferred by the Creator, they did everything possible to diminish the process while elevating the principle. Jefferson, for example, described the rights as "self-evident," meaning that there was (theoretically) no process necessary for determining what was and was not a right. But how could that be?

The reason that self-evident rights conferred by the Creator and above the edicts of man could be claimed to exist is that the founders of the nation shared a common ethos. Their ideas of rights were shaped by the theological writings and ruminations on Christian ethics that were available to and studied by all of them. Christian studies made up a large portion of anyone's education in eighteenth century America, and those studies went far beyond the simple reading of the Bible. It was this common education and ethos that made possible a system of rights that was above the hand of man.

Today, those of you who strain against the dominance of Christianity and who have in fact broken its yoke may have found certain "liberty" from Christian ethics and dogma, but you have simultaneously cut your own throats by eliminating the sole source for inalienable rights. Because if rights are not conferred by the Christian Creator, then what is their source? Modern secularist legal scholars will tell you that they were simply the product of the prevailing ethic of the time; a construct of the beliefs of the men who founded the nation. If that is so, then we are in serious trouble, because who in his right mind would want to rely on our current prevailing ethic as a source for his rights? If the belief system of the ruling class determines what are and are not rights, then the only rights we have today are the rights to beg to our government to get our own money back and to be enslaved by a global corporate system. And in fact our government daily makes "exceptions" to what were once absolute rights. Do you still have a right to keep and bear arms? Only those arms that are approve by the state and only in the place and manner the government decides to allow. Do you have a right against warrantless seizure? To free speech? To freedom of religion? Any right that may be made conditional may be eventually eliminated altogether. For all intents and purposes, we are already there. Any declaration of emergency can subject you to the whim of government, and emergency powers have been growing more broad and perpetual since the days of FDR, long before most of us were born.

There are those who will disagree, but few who may make a persuasive counter argument, that the failure of Christianity in this nation is the failure of this nation. I offer the above to make my case and I challenge anyone who disagrees to make a better one.