“Don’t Demonize Individuals, Demand Systemic Change”

the following is the last part of her entry:

Ron Paul and I probably wouldn’t agree on the role of government. He tends to see limited government as the answer, but our world has become so complex and there are so many powerful interests (e.g., monopolistic insurance companies) that a government that is willing to take vigorous action on behalf of the people, when it is impossible for them to act efficaciously on their own, is clearly necessary. What we need is a set of principles to guide our actions. Ron Paul suggests going back to the Constitution. I think a better starting point would be the Declaration of Independence, but this time we have to mean it:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their safety and happiness.”

Perhaps it’s time for another revolution. I don’t mean Minute Men and muskets, but a complete overhaul of our governance system. The incentives need to make it possible, desirable, and even necessary to serve the public interest and impossible to serve powerful special interests. How will that happen? A vigilant public that analyzes the underlying faults in the system, without demonizing individuals, and demands reform. A more vigilant press would help too.

http://history-you-live.blogspot.com

my response:

Dear Edrene

What a great blog and I hope you will become inspired to write more often, you have a gift for it.

Your focus on the Declaration is quite spot on in illuminating the dream.

Van Jones is quoted as saying:
“Dr. King didn’t get famous giving a speech that said, “I have a complaint.” It’s time for us to start dreaming again and invite the country to dream with us. We don’t have any “throw away” species, nations, or children. We must birth a global green economy strong enough to lift people out of poverty.”

The Declaration of Independence was and still is that dream waiting to find its way into the heart and conscious of the People of America.
That dream of “Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness” was given a real meaning of commitment on the bloody battlefields of the American Revolutionary War and codified in the ratification of the Constitution of the United States of America.

The journey of that dream has been long, arduous and at times extremely violent. New members of the Human family have continued to be added to that dream, but only as we all come to live it with a respect to all.

I have come to find the hope of that dream in the Constitution, the rule of just law. It was the final parting gift to “us and our posterity” that would keep alive the “Dream”. A final substantive act to preserve and protect the dream enshrined in the preamble beginning with “We the People” not Me the Person.

Thank you again for sharing your thoughts and insights for it has helped me to reestablish my relation to this foundational document “The Declaration of Independence”

Sincerely,
Joe

First published February, 2000

When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country’s founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.

Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end.

The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these:

• Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
• Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
• Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
• Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
• Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
• Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.

Oh those were the days

Read More@ http://reclaimdemocracy.org

To “establish justice” both sides of the story must be told.

More video by them here DuckODuckProductions

More video by them here DuckODuckProductions

One of the many interesting things embodied in the Constitution of the United States is reasoned openness of the phrasing used throughout. The first three words on one hand clearly define the object and focus as human beings, not artificially created entities, such as corporations. On the other hand it leaves open the proposition that includes all people regardless of status, though it took many years and great suffering for this to apply to the non-white and non-male of the United States. I would add we still have a long way to go for that equality to be applied when you consider the institutionalized inequality that still prevails today in terms of Economic, Educational, Health Care, Food, Clothing and Shelter RIGHTS.

Amendment XIV

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This amendment was required to establish the definition of Citizenship omitted from the Articles of the Constitution. It clearly establishes the ownership and thus the same responsibilities required of all Citizens from birth as some might want to consign ONLY to those 18 and older. I would submit that to in anyway impede a citizens (be they 0 to 18) efforts to speak freely or engage in anyway political way the responsibility to preserve and protect the inalienable rights all Human Beings is Unconstitutional thus illegal.