Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty-Guest Blogger
After the news over the past few months about the global uprisings against tyrannical and non-responsive governments, I have pondered why the United States has not had more people in the street protesting the economic inequality that we are facing here at home?
We have seen uprisings in Egypt, Libya, Spain, Greece and many more places, but at best we have seen large numbers in Wisconsin and Ohio protesting about State governments trying to remove collective bargaining rights away from state employees. One group of dedicated and non-violent protesters is especially interesting to me since they have taken to the streets and they have stayed there to press their fight. It is a group in Spain called the Indignados. They are camped out in various areas of Spain in an attempt to draw the country’s and the world’s attention to what they see as the Spanish government’s attempts to cater to the bankers and not to Main Street.
“Thursday night Madrid’s city centre offered a glimpse of what Western democracies have become, as thousands of unarmed nonviolent civilians with their hands up in the air shouting “these are our weapons” and “this is a dictatorship” were beaten by police commandos in full riot gear. This event was the culmination of a month of intense mobilizations across the country by the popular movement known as the ‘Indignados’. People, whom despite being ignored by the government have made their voices heard, as banking cartels, European bureaucrats, rating agencies and the country’s elites continue in their frantic push to sell-off Spain’s remaining public wealth, and persist in the implementation of drastic cuts to the welfare state. The ‘Indignados’ are fully aware of the fact that their government does not represent them, whenever they congregate they shout that loud and clear. They know that only popular unity will salvage them from the train wreck, which complicit speculators and politicians have created, and as they read the financial news, they know things can only get worse. When the EU announced today that the economic crisis is no longer restricted to the Euro-zone periphery countries, people in the movement understood that this could only mean bad news for them.” Truthout
Now, we have had some Tea Party protests, but their numbers were paltry in comparison to the Spanish protests. The numbers in Wisconsin and Ohio were the closest to the Spain numbers, but those protesters were not met with wide-spread beatings at the hands of the government and police and they are still not camping out in Madison and Columbus as they are in Madrid.
Would protestors in the United States ever commit to a continuing protest for months in Washington, D.C.? These Indignados in Spain, are continuing to protest what they see as government attempts to balance their budgets on the backs of the poor and the middle class. Why haven’t we seen tent cities springing up in Washington, D.C. and in state capitals across the country? Many progressives and liberals have claimed that Washington is working only for the bankers and Wall Street barons, so why aren’t our streets filled with dedicated people who are willing to nonviolently protest against the Rich getting richer, while the middle class and poor seem to get poorer? Is the claim of rising inequality between the rich and poor true?
Where is the evidence that the income disparity is growing in the United States? … “in dollar terms, the rich are still getting richer, and the poor are falling further behind them. The income gap between the richest and poorest Americans grew last year to its largest margin ever, a stark divide as Democrats and Republicans spar over whether to extend Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy. The top-earning 20 percent of Americans – those making more than $100,000 each year – received 49.4 percent of all income generated in the U.S., compared with the 3.4 percent made by the bottom 20 percent of earners, those who fell below the poverty line, according to the new figures. That ratio of 14.5-to-1 was an increase from 13.6 in 2008 and nearly double a low of 7.69 in 1968.At the top, the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans, who earn more than $180,000, added slightly to their annual incomes last year, the data show. Families at the $50,000 median level slipped lower.” Huffington Post
With those depressing numbers, why haven’t American “Indignados” taken over Washington, D.C. like their Spanish counterparts did in Madrid? Are Americans just too lazy or indifferent to their plight? Have they given up being able to make a real difference in Washington? Why aren’t you and I there in Washington pressing our claims for economic equality? Finally, what will it take for the American poor and jobless to stand up and say, enough is enough? Maybe you have the answer for these American Indignados!
Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty-Guest Blogger
kderosa,
“This is accurate, but not responsive to my question.”
Tough.
“If our government is premised on popular sovereignty, the consent of the governed, then how does the Constitution and subsequent laws bind those that have not consented to be bound? No one asked me to sign an oath or declaration to be bound. Why am I bound?”
You are bound because the social contract binds you to the rule of law. You submit to the rule of law for the benefits a society provides you. It is a contract you are, again, free to leave at any time. You are bound by retaining your American citizenship. If you do not wish to be subject to the laws and constructs created under the Constitution, become a citizen of another country. It’s just that simple. Just be prepared for the fact that you will, by taking their citizenship, be subject to their rules and governmental constructs instead.
“I don’t expect that such consent is realistic. Nonetheless, that does not relieve you of the burden of establishing consent.”
You don’t have to remain a citizen. It is not compelled by law. You may, again, leave the social contract at any time you like. Your consent is implicitly bound to your choice to retain your citizenship. It is your choice through action or inaction that binds you.
“If our Government is based on popular sovereignty, how can it be legitimate if less than everyone manifested a consent to be ruled by the institutions established by the Constitution?”
Because you are allowed to freely leave the arrangement. It’s an opt out kinda deal to put in language you might understand.
“If you don’t have unanimous consent, then you are left with a legal fiction.”
Again, the argument of a child (to expect the unrealistic is the hallmark of childish thinking or delusional thinking, take your pick) and unsupported by the reality of the situation. If you wish to revoke your consent, you are perfectly free – I’d even say encouraged – to do so.
Also, you keep misusing the term legal fiction. It’s a term of art and if you’re really a lawyer, you should know better. The social contract isn’t a legal fiction. It’s the foundation of government.
I’ve noticed that more than a few regulars are also dismayed at your uncivil antics. You seem to be a lone wolf at this point and it’s hard to see what you are trying to accomplish.
GeneH
“I’m as civil to you as I’m going to get.”
That is not responsive to my question.
Personally, I don’t care how civil you are. I only care about the arguments you make, your civility is irrelevant to the merits of your arguments.
@GeneH
“By the way, the answer is that our democracy is tempered by republicanism which means it is not a pure democracy, but then again, it was never intended to be. The intention of the Founders was to create a secular constitutional democratic representative republic, which is what they did. In every form of democracy, the majority rules, the main variance being in what mechanisms (if any) are instituted to protect minority rights.”
This is accurate, but not responsive to my question.
If our government is premised on popular sovereignty, the consent of the governed, then how does the Constitution and subsequent laws bind those that have not consented to be bound? No one asked me to sign an oath or declaration to be bound. Why am I bound?
“If you expect unanimous consent in a group as large as a state let alone a nation, you probably also still believe in the Tooth Fairy.”
I don’t expect that such consent is realistic. Nonetheless, that does not relieve you of the burden of establishing consent. If our Government is based on popular sovereignty, how can it be legitimate if less than everyone manifested a consent to be ruled by the institutions established by the Constitution?
If you don’t have unanimous consent, then you are left with a legal fiction.
kderosa,
I’m as civil to you as I’m going to get. If you have a problem with that, you know your options. That you’re afraid to take them is your problem.
But please, do tell us how a democracy works without majority rule.
I need another good laugh and that shark sure looks hungry.
_^_______^__
It should be noted that no particular economic form is endorsed in the Constitution other ones that recognize property rights to some degree. This would make Communism the only unconstitutional modern economic model.
@GeneH, before I address your answer on the merits, let me ask you this.
Everyone is attempting to be civil here regardless of what transpired in the past, why can’t you be?
Gyges,
I hear you. I now use RSS/Comments to keep better track of the history in a high frequency environment, or just to look for particular posters.
I’ve made a few suggestions to JT over the years, particularly regarding comment drafts and edit capabilities that haven’t materialized. Expanding the “most recent” comments to 20 – 25 might address your concerns as well.
Actually, I’d also like to see voting buttons for comments, with high negative comments collapsed.
OS,
It might have been Midnight Moon, it was several years ago, and I just remember most of it got used for sterilizing things. Other than the initial taste, the one time I can remember drinking it I wanted to get really classy, so I smoked a fine cigar (Swisher Sweet, with the wood tip) and drank a glass of it.
I’m sorry, kderosa, but I don’t need to repeat that to believe it. I’ve thought that since the day a started reading your nonsense. It also helps to believe something if it is true.
By the way, the answer is that our democracy is tempered by republicanism which means it is not a pure democracy, but then again, it was never intended to be. The intention of the Founders was to create a secular constitutional democratic representative republic, which is what they did. In every form of democracy, the majority rules, the main variance being in what mechanisms (if any) are instituted to protect minority rights. If you expect unanimous consent in a group as large as a state let alone a nation, you probably also still believe in the Tooth Fairy. It comes as no surprise that you are anti-democratic though. Your corporatist line is against equality under the law (a prime tenet of democracy) as is the requirement of their oligarchical bent.
Also, here’s an idea . . . since you’ve jumped the shark, next time why don’t you just create a claim for me and then evade answering it until you come up with something ridiculous? Cut out the middle man on your getting to the shark tank. It’ll be just as funny.
Gyges, the Midnight Moon people make a product they call “Midnight Moon aged with fruit.” They bottle it in Mason jars. Here is their description:
“Midnight Moon Apple Pie, Cherry and Strawberry spirits each begin with the handcrafted, ultra-smooth Midnight Moon recipe. Real fruit and Midnight Moon are then placed in mason jars by hand (just like moonshiners have done for generations). Apple Pie, Cherry and Strawberry age in the jar for several weeks, to ensure each bottle reaches the peak of all-natural fruit flavor before it leaves the distillery.”
@OS, I do not believe I ever have consumed and I have definitely never made.
Kd, have you tried Kvas? Either to consume it or make it? If the latter, how do you make it–what is your recipe?
Puzzling,
Look at what I was complaining about… Then look at the length and spacing of the average comments before this one and after it….
http://jonathanturley.org/2011/08/07/is-an-economic-revolution-possible-in-the-united-states/#comment-258412
Then consider that JT has in the past requested that we keep back to back posting to a minimum so that comments on various topics don’t get lost in the flood.
OS,
There’s a great local distillery that makes Hooch from Sugar Beats and Corn. There’s another one (I don’t remember where it’s located) that sells their corn whiskey in hand labeled Mason Jars with a date so that you know it’s “under 6 months old.”
@OS, to the extent that fermented beverages are regulated by law, it has everything to do with it.
kderosa, what has that got to do with fermented beverages?
@GeneH, are you trying to claim that a majority of the people can bind all the poeple?
Midnight Moon is 86 proof, so Junior is quick to point out that the original family recipe yielded a 100 proof product.
Gene,
No, I can pretty much guarantee, whatever taste you’re imaging in your head, it’s right. You soak bread in water for awhile, then add yeast, and maybe some other fixings. It’s not good, but it is easy, and if you stick it in the freezer you can distill it to like 4% ABV.
I agree with kd that the thread has actually been productive. I am always glad to see the elusive ekeyra – of course – but enjoy the speed of the discussion.