Is the U.S. a Capitalist Commonwealth?

america-1295554_640

The following was a comment in a discussion taking place on “Ark’s” blog. I would provide a link, but the conversation is quite lengthy — plus it has somewhat wandered from the original topic.

Nevertheless, I felt this particular entry was significant and would be interested in your thoughts.

The US is not a Republic or a Democracy.
1) We do not follow the Constitution.
2) We do not listen to the majority of the people.

The US is a Capitalist Commonwealth

Money controls the government, business, health, home, religion, science, and culture. The poor staff the military to fight wars for resources that the middle class uses to make the rich richer. Even the news we watch is controlled by money.

While I feel there is a measure of truth in this person’s remark, I would tend to be a bit more circumspect in that I feel we DO follow the Constitution, albeit selectively, and often based on “political” interpretation.

Do “we” (the government) listen to the majority of the people? Generally speaking, I would say yes. However, one has to ask – when laws and measures are passed that benefit one group over another, has the “majority” been served?

I doubt there is much disagreement with this person’s comment that MONEY is the controlling factor behind much of what takes place in the U.S. But does this make us a “Capitalist Commonwealth”?

So what do you think? Is this person’s comment “spot-on”? Or is it too extreme?

***************************************
Image by OpenClipart-Vectors from Pixabay

71 thoughts on “Is the U.S. a Capitalist Commonwealth?

  1. Not even capitalist — Corporatism killed Capitalism under Reagan.

    But it is true, you’re not really a functioning democracy. Only in the US can you have a vote 54 to 35 (Senate vote on the 1/6 commission), and the 35 Nays have it.

    Liked by 10 people

  2. Of course it’s a democracy – a liberal democracy – but it is far from perfect or ideal as the criticisms raised reveal. The system of democracy in action is synonymous with mob rule so something else is being described here. And this means ‘democracy’ in any form is constantly being manipulated and in all kinds of ways to try to pry advantage to some that creates disadvantage to others using ‘the rule of the people’ as its justification. But that’s not anywhere near what democracy actually means in practice from the Western perspective. From money to gerrymandering, from rules of process to means of application and enforcement, the democracy that is shared by all Western countries is constantly being pressured to serve these interests over those interests. And so it goes.

    It’s a democracy because public authority comes from the governed – sometimes directly – who have the means by vote to replace those in positions of public authority. It’s the vote that matters here not because it is cast but because it has special authority in law. So the more important aspect is not that it is a democracy but that it is a liberal democracy. That means that the authority being transferred to the offices that govern is recognized in law as coming from the authority of the individual. This is the key aspect that the Constitution establishes as the basis of legitimate rule.

    The individual has legal autonomy above and beyond all other measures. This is core. Then individual. That’s why the vote means anything. The cast vote by each individual IS the consent that transfers authority to public offices. Not individuals who temporarily hold public offices but the office itself. This is what is expanded upon and demonstrated by the legal recognition, protection, and enforcement of individual rights and freedoms. This is the foundation of principle that legitimizes the authority various institutions exercise. So it is the legitimacy of this authority that is set down; what happens, however, is that the authority is abused by various people who hold institutional offices and is constantly under threat not just from special organized interests but by the willingness of some to give it away in the name of something else. And we see this occur all the time.

    Over time, we see this tension played out in policy much like a pendulum swinging too much towards individual predominance at some historical periods and other times towards too much social predominance. And anywhere that pendulum might be almost always has people claiming because it’s not where it ‘should’ be, democracy is askew. That’s when we start seeing descriptors place before ‘liberal democracy’, something hyphenated, something with a mandatory adjective in front of the term. But the noun is still present -democracy – because public office still relies on the liberal principle that authority comes only from consent of the people no matter how badly abused that principle might be at any one time.

    Liked by 5 people

  3. Gerrymandering, voter suppression laws, members of Congress ‘owned’ by corporate interests, white supremacy applauded and supported by one of the two major political parties, a 20-year-old minimum wage rate that keeps a significant portion of the populace under the corporate thumb, and the list goes on … no, we are no longer a democratic republic. We are a plutocracy. Corporate interests over the best interest of the people. Our vote, you say? How many will be disenfranchised by the time of the next election and the one after that? How many people’s votes are diluted by gerrymandered districting? And who’s to say that next time a party attempts to overturn a fair and honest election such as was done on January 6th, they won’t succeed? That certain party is doing everything in its power to sweep January 6th under the rug, not allow new safeguards to be put into place. And the Constitution? What about ‘separation of church and state’? The only part of the Constitution that is rigorously upheld by the people of this nation is the 2nd Amendment.

    Capitalist Commonwealth, plutocracy, oligarchy … they are all just labels and there is some of each in our current system, but very little left of true democratic principles.

    Liked by 9 people

    • That’s not true. The Left don’t want Jan 6th investigated for reasons that, it’ll come right back to them. There’s tons of footage, for people to view.
      Just because Nutty Nancy puts Trump gear on their thugs, DOES NOT make them Trump Supporters. CNN paying $28 000 to the BLM guy to aid them. After all the drama CNN & Guy from BLM, laughing and hi five- ing that they pulled it off. They thought the camera was off, they even ask the camera man , who responds yes. But he lied, it was running & what they said etc was all caught on tape. So believe me we want an investigation but just like the Covid virus, they dragged their feet on the investigation, for the same reasons. Like a boomerang, it’ll all come right back to the Left. So don’t presume the right are holding up the investigation, because that is not the case, at all. White Supremacy ? The only White Supremacy I see, Is those in office & they not all White so not sure how you worked that in there.
      Anyway at the end of the day, there are a tremendous amount of changes coming & they’ll be for the better of the country, without a doubt. The Government is far too big & far too corrupt. Running an international crime syndicate, right out of the WH & it’s been official filed in certain countries , where these same Deep State Players went into foreign countries & basically robbed them, of their wealthy. The Left love Wars and they cost a lot of money. The assets they stole, were listed when the audits were done for the reset. Apparently they needed money to fund their endless wars. Not sure how using an official office to rob countries, of their Gold etc, will work out. But I’d say it’s a good thing, that we are under Marshall Law, while they sort it out.
      Whether you support the Left or the Right, we should all want the same thing.
      Biden got 21 million votes , Trump got 84 million votes. Only a Demonic DemonRat, would see that as a landslide for Beijing Biden.
      So it’s no surprise they sent 110 attorneys & the FBI to stop the Audit.
      I don’t know anyone, who has nothing to hide, that hires that many attorneys & sends the FBI to strong arm the auditors & shut them down.
      People that believe that’s the usual behavior of an innocent party, need help.

      Liked by 1 person

            • Oh and censoring You Tube who hide the Truth are great right ? You leftists all think with your close deceived minds. Deceived because you trust the enemy. There’s nothing wrong with viewing all sides of a story . No serious researcher comes to YT to do research & Rumble seems to be competing with them, in hiding facts often. There are many other platforms to search. Just as we know Google isn’t the search engine to use, nor is Safari. You use Brave or Duck Duck Go

              Like

            • No, there’s nothing wrong with viewing all sides of a story — so long as both sides can offer credible sources to back up their viewpoints.

              I would like to point out that my blog is open to all — and I don’t mind including comments from those who disagree with my post topics. However, when it comes to political discussions, I expect any visitor who disagrees to offer valid and reasonable arguments without the usual rhetoric and insults that so often come into play. (Example: You leftists all think with your close deceived minds.)

              Having said that, I have decided to moderate any of your future comments.

              Liked by 2 people

            • I had no intention of making future posts on there. If people aren’t awake yet, I will leave them to sleep. I’ve spent well over a decade trying to wake them up. Right now time is of the essence & saving mankind is crucial. Thank you for your comment

              Like

        • I do my homework you should try it & you would have to leave sarcastic remarks. It also helps if you open your mind, eyes & ears. Why don’t you go to Mike Lindel’s site he has a full video on the entire election fraud including how it was done and even the time it was done.

          Like

          • Right, well … believe what you will, I think you’re so full of conspiracy theories that you wouldn’t know truth if it hit you in the face, and frankly I’m done wasting my time arguing with you. Not worth the effort.

            Liked by 2 people

          • Of course! Mike Lindell is so much more insightful and intelligent that those who serve on the Supreme Court. You know … those HIGHLY EDUCATED AND EXPERIENCED people who refused to consider all the complaints and howlings of Trump supporters when they bellyached that the election results weren’t valid.

            Like

            • I never said that , he hired experts to do it. He never did it himself. Why don’t you watch it before commenting. The Supreme Court is compromised , if they weren’t they have a look. Every American should want to know their voices count . Sending 110 attorneys & the FBI to stop the audit. Should enraged everyone seeking the truth. If they got nothing to hide, they sure behavior very differently to an innocent party. They anything but Transparent. They’ve been doing this for decades why do you think the sting operation was set up by the Military. Or weren’t you aware of that either.

              Like

      • It’s not presumption that the left are holing up an investigation, it’s a fact. When put before the senate the Republicans naysayed it and Moscow Mitch applied the death knell with the filibuster.
        Enough people have now been arrested from 6th January to know who they were following and why. And it wasn’t the left.
        Trump miscalculated on Covid19 from the start and has been televised enough times making mistakes or telling lies to cover mistakes that it’s been seen across the world. His stupidity in saying it was like a cold and would be gone in a few days to his remarks about not needing to wear a mask, while sitting close to a world renowned scientist who said the opposite cost many American lives.
        If you can’t recognise white supremacy I can only assume you have eye problems or are in training to be a future apologist for one of those groups, Proud Boys perhaps.
        I’m not sure where these future changes are coming from since the Republicans don’t have a solitary policy going forward because in thee words of one of your leaders this week (filmed) they prefer chaos.
        Only an idiot would dispute the Election results when enough REPUBLICAN officers declared the results were genuine and there had been no fraud. Else maybe the Democrats would have been claiming 84 million and giving Trump just 21 million.
        If you must argue you should bring FACTS to the party
        Hugs

        Liked by 7 people

        • The evidence is clear by Trump rallies & live viewing numbers as opposed to Biden rallies of 6 people or even how many viewers view his incoherent babbling speeches. But until people want to see the Truth , they’ll keep pretending it’s false.

          Like

  4. Nan, interesting supposition. Money abounds in politics and these donors are not just giving it away. They are investing in politicians. Members of Congress spend more than 1/3 of their time fund raising (that is statistic provided by a Congressman who left in frustration). And, between the two SCOTUS rulings on Citizens-United and McCutcheon, dark money can fund any election anywhere and not have to disclose who is behind the money.

    It frustrates me that nothing gets done as politicians are paid to not do anything detrimental to funders. They are not there to solve problems unless it aligns with some monied interest. Just think of why the December 2017 tax cut for corporations and wealthy people was passed. The donors told the majority party you better pass something or don’t count on our support.

    As for capitalism, the US has a fettered capitalistic model with socialist underpinnings. On the fettered part think rules on insider trading, monopolies, interlocking boards, opposite way trading, etc. As for the latter, think Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Unemployment, Workers Comp, etc. For some reason, one party wants you to ignore the socialist part even though everyone benefits at some point.

    Getting money out of politics is nigh impossible, but we should try. The two SCOTUS rulings were abysmal, in my view. We could start with term limits to limit the investment return on funding politicians. We could shorten the election period and make voting mandatory as done in other countries. That would get us away from the voter suppression effort of one party. We could also prevent politicians from becoming lobbyists – full stop – or at least reintroduce time restrictions.

    Keith

    Liked by 6 people

    • There’s certainly no denying that our current political setup is a mess! And sadly, with Trump and his cronies running around and broadcasting to the gullible that “their way” is so much better, there’s little hope things will improve anytime in the foreseeable future.

      I agree with your suggestions but regrettably, I fear they are a pipe dream unless we can keep a Democrat in the White House until (at least) 2028 so major “adjustments” in the system can take hold. Of course with the gerrymandering being done related to the voting laws, such an event is a long shot.

      Liked by 4 people

      • The maximum contribution per individual or company per year in Canada is $1550. Any contribution over $200 must list the donor’s name and only donation of up to $650 receives any tax credit. So, conceivably, one could donate about $60K per year by giving slightly less than $200 to each of 308 ridings!

        The issue of dark money in politics is very important (and we see the effect in the US), which is why out of some 40 years of public office including over 10 as Prime Minister of Canada, when asked about his most important contribution (and he made many) Chretien said it was this addressing dark money – by capping of political contributions and making larger donors reveal their identity – he thought would be his major legacy.

        So it can be done and receive public support. But then, many will argue Canada cannot possibly be a democracy because we have an unelected head of state so we have no legitimacy talking about it. Mind you, we don’t have limited number of terms in office, either, so politicians aren’t quite so focused on only the next election cycle as we see coming out of the US.

        Liked by 4 people

        • I would argue that we do not have an unelected head of state, meaning the officer of Prime Minister. Once upon a time we elected MPs on their own merits, nowadays we elect by party, more explicitly by who is head of each party.The vote for Prime Minister is not direct, but it certainly is implied.

          Liked by 3 people

            • The Crown may be of little importance to you on a day to day basis but is a key pillar to both the political and legal system we share in Canada. Without the Crown overseeing Canada’s Treaty system, for example, and empowering it in law, we could have actually done something about the Indian Act over half a century ago. We could have addressed a broken system that continues to yield so much dysfunction today. But to get rid of the Crown now would mean a complete dissolution of Canada in all ways – from the local to the national – and dismantle every single institution whose chain of authority leads back to the Crown for legitimacy. To then imagine a coming together after such a dissolution to reform into a Republic from such a diverse population I think is magical thinking of the worst kind because it just doesn’t happen. It doesn’t happen because it is SO much easier to say No, to tear down and destroy, than it is to say Yes, and commit to building through cooperation and consensus. All it takes is one participant to kibosh the entire process.

              So we are stuck with what we have if we wish to have any social order whatsoever. Meaningful change, however, can and does occur within the system we have.

              Liked by 2 people

            • As a person of Metis descent, what you call change is slow, and basically meaningless. We are still third class citizens, looked down on by white and red equally. But it was our people who opened up much of Canada to European settlers, qnd nobody thanks us for that. In Alberta they put us on settlements, where we barely have electricity and indoor plumbing. You want to live
              Like that? I bet not. First Nations people are generally even worse than us. If you call that progress, this being 2021, I would hate to see where things will be in 2050.

              Liked by 3 people

            • I don’t. I live ho2 I want to live. But all Métis are cousins, and my cousins are treated like shit, especially by the Canadian government, despite today’s token gesture in naming an indigenous Governor General. .

              Liked by 2 people

            • Your PM is pushing for Dictatorship, communism from what I’ve heard. Closing churches down & arresting the Preachers. I hope this doesn’t happen. Communism sounds good on paper, but has Never been successful, when put it into practice. We have the same problem with our Leftists, they pushing for a communist leaning agenda. It works great in the beginning , until they run out of Other People’s money

              Liked by 2 people

            • That has nothing to do with Communism. Where the hell did you get that idea. And the Prime Minister has NOTHING to do with it.
              It is all about Premier of Alberta, Jason Kennedy, whom we Albertans call Mini-Trump. He tries so hard to be like Trump, but he fails every time.
              The churches would not have been closed BUT THE PREACHER REFUSED TO obey Covid rules. All he had to do was limit his churchgoers to 25% capacity, but he told everyone who could to come and disobey the new laws. He was given several warnings, but he thought he was bigger than the government. Because he would not obey, (99% of churches in Alberta obeyed,) but not him. So first they locked the doors on the church, but he had his people congregate outside without masks or social distancing. So after months of giving him warnings, they finally arrested him.
              If that is Communism to you, you have no idea what Communism is, and if you think he was right to ignore all the rules, you should be in jail along with him.
              Know the facts before you spout off about things you do not understand.

              Liked by 4 people

            • You wrote a “mouthful,” tildeb, with this …

              it is SO much easier to say No, to tear down and destroy, than it is to say Yes, and commit to building through cooperation and consensus.

              And this is seen time and time again in government. Witness the infamous January 6th event.

              Like

            • Hello Catherine Haessig, what do you find appealing in Communism on paper?

              What do you mean Communism has never been successfull when put to practice? Do you refer to the downfall of the Soviet Union? Or that it had turned from the road to a Communistic country to a dictatorship and then to regressive & ultraconservative? You are propably not referring to Communist countries like the Soviet Union and Vietnam defeating capitalistic Nazi-Germany and USA in war? You surely are not comparing Communist Cuba to Capitalist Haiti? Are you?

              Who are the other people, whose money you refer to? Do you really think that it took the Soviet Union some 70 years before they run out of the money collected by the Tsars by exploiting the Russian people?

              Liked by 1 person

      • Gerrymandering is and has been and shall continue to be practiced by both parties. That’s not the problem.

        In its current iteration, the Republican Party is an existential threat to the US and in so many ways. So the solution has be aimed at disempowering the Republicans in the system that allows them power.

        The fuel is with the Left. There’s your solution. And that’s what is NOT changing. So Biden is just a temporary stop gap for now until the Senate is lost yet again to the Republicans. And so it goes. The foolishness of Democratic progressives is breath-takingly stupid.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Not only the foolishness, but as I recently commented elsewhere, their “silence” doesn’t help them either. That is, the Republicans constantly use the media to further their political *crap* while the Democrats seem to think all they need to do is “be an example.”

          Liked by 3 people

          • The only one controlling the media are the Democrats, they’ve always controlled MSM that’s why the news on MSM isn’t worthy of calling it news. They enable the left & cover for them. But I’m sure each parties members see things differently. We dealing with people who are deceiving, Deception is their Game. This makes it more difficult to deal with. They’d be wise getting rid of all those uninformative MSM & it’s players. I have never seen so many, that have no clue what’s actually going on, due to the fact, they never given the Truth. Most of the Lefts supporters have big trust for MSM, so it’s normally them, that’s uninformed. Just saying

            Liked by 1 person

      • Unless we plan to sell America to China getting rid of the DemonRats should be key. It’s them that are up to all kinds of criminal activity. It’s them that have brought much embarrassment to the country by robbing other countries after , they install their puppets into power. But as of now, much is happening to fix this bunch of career self- elected Politicians. Keep your eyes open & the Truth will come out. It has a habit of doing that, no matter how deep they try and bury it.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Took the words right out of my mouth, SAP. The wealth in America is certainly not common to all, but a small privileged few. Yet the ones paying the interest on that huge deficit, are not the wealthy, but the poor.

      Liked by 3 people

    • The meaning of the term is to describe a political community founded for a common good. Wealth held by the commons – the public – more accurately describes a commune, the root sense of communism.

      Liked by 3 people

  5. Let’s just start here:

    The Preamble
    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
    (A preamble is an introductory and expressionary statement in a document that explains the document’s purpose and underlying philosophy. Like the first paragraph of your essay. )

    A constitutional republic, such as we are, is a (democratic) system of governance in which the people elect representatives to take care of the affairs of the state for the common good of all the citizens. The preamble is not just pretty prose or window dressing for the rest of the document. “We the people…do ordain (order) and establish (set up) this Constitution (the set of laws which will govern) for the United States of America.

    We are a constitutional republic with a democratic government.

    What our founding documents say we are and what our behavior says we are cannot agree. We would be hard put to make an argument against those statements except the “Capitalist Commonwealth.” There is not one thought in capitalism for the commonwealth or the common good. We would need to understand what the person making that statement means by it. Otherwise, the comments are true, but as someone said, we need to look at them with a more circumspect view.

    We just had several members of Congress vote to overturn a legitimate election. We have members of both House and Senate who ignore the constitution and the will of the people:

    “The idea of democracy and majority rule really is what goes against our history and what the country stands for,” Paul said. “The Jim Crow laws came out of democracy. That’s what you get when a majority ignores the rights of others.”
    Sen. Rand Paul, Ky.

    I know this is Rand Paul speaking, but to know that a US Senator could stand on the floor of the Senate and make such a statement indicates just where we are. I know you can see the incongruity of the statement and the idea behind it.

    Hill in March rationalized his opposition to the Medicaid expansion in remarkable terms.
    “Even though my constituents voted for this lie, I’m going to protect them,” he said. “I am proud to stand against the will of the people.”
    Rep. Justin Hill, Mo.
    “I am proud to stand against the will of the people.”

    Seventy to eighty percent of Americans, all parties, are in favor of the legislation proposed by the Democrats. From the ACA to the Voting Rights Act, yet it is opposed by the majority of the GOP because it is opposed by all capitalists whose money keeps them in office. Capitalists also fund that wing of the Christian church who calls themselves Nationalists, who also fight tooth and nail to destroy democracy.

    A digression, if I may. I was very glad to see that there are Christians beginning to fight back against the people who have hijacked their religion:
    “Christian nationalism comes from a place of insecurity and fear. Jesus said we should “fear not!” Christian nationalism rejects Christ’s teachings and manipulates our faith to deny the inherent dignity of every person. Additionally, in our pluralistic society where we meet is the Constitutional vision: “We the People.” Christian nationalism is unpatriotic and unchristian. There is no room for these wicked attitudes in our nation!”
    https://www.christiansagainstchristiannationalism.org/endorsers
    Atheist that I am, I’m glad to be able to post that.

    And what Jill said. BTW, Jill, I think it is ok to call them Republicans. Everybody knows. We have all this going on with a Supreme Court that is not bashful about showing their conservative bias. We have Democrats in Congress, for the most part, going about their business with no apparent sense of urgency for what we see daily from the GOP and the Court.

    Liked by 3 people

  6. What might be surprising to some is that the role of great gobs of money directed towards politicians is actually quite recent.

    The role of dark money – meaning money that cannot be traced to particular donors – in electing people – especially Republicans – cannot be overstated. I say that because many Republicans are heavily funded this way… to the tune of about 85% versus Democrats who receive about 30% this way (so far).

    Dark money is money donated by ‘non profits’ and now include corporations, unions, and individuals! Although it first came into effect in 1976 by a court case involving an actual non profit organization, it really didn’t play a significant role until the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 for the Citizen United case in 2010, which expanded this meaning to include just about anyone and anything to any amount and all with unreported connections.

    What could go wrong?

    To show the scope of the problem today, consider that combined contributions were just over 5 million bucks when this first started. It is estimated now to be well over a billion dollars for the 2020 election alone and is only growing in malignant importance across the political spectrum in the US and demonstrates the power of the courts to legislate (as ridiculous as this sounds considering the Constitutional intention is to counter-balance popular legislation that goes too far by upholding fundamental principles that constrain such over-reaching impulses).

    Liked by 5 people

  7. I guess my only comment would be “same as it ever was”. The United States was founded by a class of slaveowning aristocrats who were unhappy that the British government was making noises about interfering with their land speculation deals on the frontier.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. I would answer your question at the end Nan as: fairly spot-on. Tildeb summed up our country well:

    Of course it’s a democracy – a liberal democracy – but it is far from perfect or ideal as the criticisms raised reveal.

    And Nan, I would agree with you regarding the question of whether or not our federal government and several state governments (not all) do indeed listen to the majority of the people. However, as one examines all 50 state governments closely over decades using the using the Principles & Virtues of our Bill of Rights as the template, I think you’ll find MANY cases presently and in history that DO NOT listen to the majority, especially if that majority is of a certain impoverished economic class or racial/ethnic class. And examining those specific cases on the state level, one can find a whole host of appalling (illegal?) prejudices and blatant discriminations. Personally, I can list too many in my home state of Texas the last 3-5 decades.

    As is the case in all athletic sporting leagues, associations, conferences, etc, in the U.S.—and abroad as well too—from the sports inception, it is human nature (nurtured by our transgenerational obsession for individual freedoms & liberties in the pursuit of individual, competitive, dog-eat-dog success) to find any and all ‘loop-holes’ to bend the rules/laws in your favor no matter the cost, no matter whether you represent the majority or not. For example, the principle/virtue of Majority Rule/Minority Rights — Laws may be made with the consent of the majority, subject to the limitation that those laws do not infringe on the inalienable rights of the minority.

    But honestly, how many Americans today with an excellent or sufficient under-grad or post-grad education in American & State governments can precisely DEFINE and expound upon WHAT that means!? HAH!

    As a result of this U.S. sociopolitical and economic programming over many generations, especially so since the end of WW2, principles and virtues of our Constitution and Bill of Rights on the FEDERAL level have indeed been lost or completely ignored on many State levels and on the county/municipal levels they’ve been blatantly ignored… or IOW defrauded and distorted by far too much money.

    Furthermore, how many of the “Majority” in America—i.e. moderates, semi-liberals, anyone not an extremist—who SHOULD have eagle-eye oversight on our democratic Republic governments and politicians have taken on their personal privilege (duty?) to stay VERY active and extremely well-informed of the affairs of ALL levels of government month to month, year after year? A guess anyone?

    The “Majority’s” track-record of America’s Moderates and Slightly Left or Right of center for the last 2-3 decades is actually pretty shitty when one reviews voter turnout every 2 and 4-years. So who bears at least the majority of the blame, if not all the blame for the current condition of the USofA? 😦 My final assessment would be this: America’s moderate Majority have been asleep at the wheel for decades! This is what happens when one IGNORES your political privileges, virtues, and rights not just for yourself, but other Americans.

    A Constitutional democracy/Republic REQUIRES, DEMANDS incessant vigilance by its citizens. That’s always been embarrassingly, painfully true in a democracy and even in our and world-wide athletic sporting organizations. If you don’t exercise those rights, then you are essentially welcoming and endorsing cheaters to take from you AND your children. Period!

    Liked by 3 people

    • Is Canada a democracy?

      Again, just as a comparison, a government in Canada (both federally and provincially) can have a majority government (meaning more than 50% of the riding seats in parliament). This means a government can automatically pass legislation just by its own members, so it’s powerful. A minority government requires support from other parties to achieve the same majority to pass legislation. When legislation fails, this automatically triggers an election (any money bill). To achieve this in-power result, a party’s representative or independent has to win enough ridings. We use what’s called ‘first past the post’. Whoever gets the most votes in a riding wins it. So a riding with just the usual 3 parties can be won by a candidate that represents just over 1/3rd of those who voted. If voting turnout is, say, 50% of eligible voters and the winner receives just over a 3rd of those cast, the winner represents about 10% of that riding’s population! Multiply that across a country and you can figure out that a majority government almost never represents a majority of the population yet is empowered to act as if it does.

      Is Canada therefore not a democracy because no party ever wins more than 50% of the population?

      Well, it is a democracy because we pick and choose our own government(s) by voting but this form is called a Constitutional Monarchy rather than a Republic. It’s still a liberal democracy because the form doesn’t determine whether or not it is (remember, that liberal part means rule by the consent of the governed as signified by voting rights for the individuals who constitute them) but it does determine how that democracy operates, by what rules and regulations right up to but never over and above the legal rights of the individual granting consent.

      The monarchy part is the authorization for the form; liberal democracy is authorization for the function. To claim it’s not a democracy – not a true or legitimate one because it is not authorized by 50% plus 1 of the entire population – misses the very useful and meaningful reasons why it is a functioning democracy! (We simply don’t get the kind of gridlock or partisanship entrenchment so enjoyed by our more ‘grown up’ southern neighbour.)

      Liked by 2 people

  9. We are a Republic. It depends on who’s in power. The Left do as they please, they don’t care what the people think & say. They don’t even care if the people vote or not. After decades of rigging elections, they are basically Self – Elected, by dead people. That will explain, why they don’t care about the People. Remember America was a corporation, until President Trump dissolved the Vatican owned Corporation. So we have reverted back to a Republic. Lots happening so we have to see, what the new looks like . Many changes coming

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hello Catherine. Thank you for visiting and offering your perspective on the blog topic.

      After perusing your several comments, it’s apparent you feel the “The Left” is the culprit and is taking this country down the tubes. I disagree … and I have a hunch most of my regular visitors do as well. But I’ll let them speak for themselves.

      The difference in political perspective is part of our country’s history. What I find discouraging is that so many are only able to offer insults rather than constructive criticism.

      P.S. I encourage you to read Heather Cox Richardson’s newsletter. She is a political historian and can point out that what is happening today is nothing new.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Nan: You are, as always, much kinder and calmer than many of us would be. She is not interested in a liberalish blog. She has her…religion.

        Catherine, from her language, believes in a “special” type of non-politics, no anti-politics. The reference to a corporation is the clue. She is spouting “sovereign citizen” nonsense, and they are just nuts. (The whole Donald Trump dissolving the Vatican controlled corporation nonsense is another clue.) This is the wackaloon stuff that got Wesley Snipes thrown in prison for a few years because Wesley Snipes was a sovereign citizen who don’t owe no taxes to the corporation blah blah blah

        If you have never run across this stuff, which makes Q Anon seem rational (after all, too many of our elites DID hang around with Jeffrey Epstein), may I suggest a good source here:

        https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen

        Enjoy. It is quite an interesting world view.

        Liked by 3 people

  10. From outside the US is a republic in the sense that it is not a monarchy. It is a democracy in the sense that there are elections that are described by outside observers to be fair.

    Democracies are voulnerable to mob mentality. Nationalistic tribal moralism is raising it’s ugly head once again all over the world in monarchies, dictatorships and in republics regardless how democratic they are. There is a deep and growingly apparent division between people who live more and more in the real and subsequently more moral world and those who fall deeper and deeper into a world wich they’d prefer that has no connection to real world, because they are the victims of lies and their own incapacity to recognize truth from “alternative facts”.

    Money seems to be a strangely overemphasized part of the US culture. A culture of economical competition. It seems bloody and motivated, by extreme commercialism in wich the advertizer sends a repeated message, that your human value depends on consumption and the fact that if you are poor there is very little support. The values of the society stand on money and earnings. The US has shown a beacon of freedom for many in the world for a couple of hundred years. But – whose freedom to do what? Mine to exploit and abuse you? US has also enslaved and then liberated both it’s own people and others.

    Liked by 4 people

    • rautakyy: always respect your opinion! I am a bit of a “Finn-o-phile”. Not because I have visited there (I don’t really like winter very much) but because of the architecture and music scenes. (I am into seriously messed up heavy metal). So kudos again!

      Liked by 3 people

    • Hello Popular Opinion. Thank you for visiting my blog.

      I am approving your comment since your linked post supports the perspective of most of my “regulars.” However, for future reference, I prefer visitors share their thoughts rather than just leave a link. Further, your post is about one man, whereas my blog topic is about the U.S.

      Thank you for your understanding.

      Liked by 1 person

      • See what I mean? Like with creationists, when there’s no common ground that allows as much evidence as possible accumulated from reality to play its arbitrating part, there’s no possibility of honest exploration and communication. I can almost hear the mind snap shut from here.

        Like

  11. I think rather than ‘capitalist commonwealth’ the word you’re looking for is ‘plutocracy’. And I agree with john zande that the US is more corporatist than capitalist (though probably not as corporatist as we are here in the corporatist colony of Australia). But I think that goes much further back than Reagan to at least the late 19th Century.

    And no, neither the US nor Australia are democracies, any more than periodic elections made the Soviet Union a democracy or a constitution based on the US one makes Vietnam a democracy. Those countries are/were explicitly one party states but Australia and the US are effectively one party states too, with different wings of the corporatist party alternating control of the corporation-serving government. Yeah, we’ve got non-corporatist parties with token representation in both our countries, but they’ll never gain power unless they bow under the corporatist yoke. Election financing and corporate control of the media ensures that.

    Like

Don't Be Shy -- Tell Us What You Think!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.