The core problem we need to face and deal with is the false belief that gives rise to an economic system "capitalism", which in turn produces a governing system that is anti-democratic.
The false belief is that people who are able to acquire and accumulate ever-increasing wealth, are somehow superior to everyone else, and should be in charge of running everything. That is the core belief of capitalism, which is the economic system that our Constitution was written to protect and actively promote! While "capitalism" is not mentioned by name in the Constitution, it's core belief gave rise to our Constitution and the framework of the US government.
Most people think that our Constitution was set up to make sure we never have a king… and while that's true, it was also NOT set up to give all the power to the people as a whole. It was set up to give all the power to the wealthy NON-Royal PROPERTY OWNERS… NOT the working class… NOT the slaves… and NOT the employees... but to give that power to the EMPLOYERS!
So while our system of government was set up to guard against any Royal hierarchy, it was also guarding against any takeover by employees and slaves!
We have an Executive branch with a President who is the Commander in Chief! That means the President is part of the military and gives all the orders… a totally top down hierarchy! Nothing democratic there.
We have a Senate, which is the antithesis of democracy (set up with 2 Senators per state, so that some votes count hundreds of times more than others). I call it the UNdemocratic Senate.
We have a Supreme Court, with members who are not elected. Instead, they are appointed by the President with only the UNdemocratic Senate’s approval. It also has no way to enforce its decisions, and its justices can only be removed by agreement of both the House and the UNdemocratic Senate.
We have a House, which has no power to remove a President or Supreme Court Justice unless the UNdemocratic Senate agrees.
So our Executive branch is virtually all-powerful because the President is immune to impeachment and removal from office unless the UNdemocratic Senate (as well as the House) agree.
Therefore, the so-called "balance of power” exists in name only. There is virtually NO way to enforce it! Our Constitution ignores the fact that it is the Constitution itself that set up our electoral system, which ensure that it will ALWAYS be the richest who hold the majority of seats in all branches of our government!
This should not surprise us, since our Constitution was written by the richest adult white males in the colonies, and was written to protect their property and their right to continue hoarding more and more wealth (which at that time, included enslaved human beings, most of whom were not white, and some who... even though white…. were so poor that they had to become “indentured” to survive).
So, despite all the wonderful “equality"language of our “Proclamation of Independence”…. the ONLY humans our Constitution gave any rights to, were rich adult white males…… NOT democracy by any stretch of imagination!
If we continue to ignore and/or refuse to remedy the massively flawed assumptions that gave rise to our Constitution and economic system…. we will NEVER escape being ruled by the richest narcissists, because they are precisely who are rewarded the most under capitalism! It rewards those who are the most ruthless in raking in more and more wealth regardless of who is harmed in so doing!
I realize that many on the left are fearful that any action to rewrite our Constitution could result in the "right" rewriting it in the way they want, which would certainly not be to make it more democratic. But if you do harbor that fear, I ask you 2 questions:
1. Do you believe that to have a fair and just government, all people should have the same rights under law, and that in order for the law to be really fair and just, it must be created by a consensus (or at least a strong majority) of all the people governed?
2. If you do believe this, then why do you NOT believe that the majority of people in the USA can create a new Constitution that is truly fair and just? Why do you believe that coming together as a collective whole, for the first time in our country's history, would NOT result in an improved, fairer, and more just Constitution? In other words, if you really believe in democracy (which means you believe that as a whole, most people are fair and just) then how can you NOT believe that those same fair and just minded people would not prevail in a rewrite of the Constitution?
Bravo! A brave and compelling exegesis of the limits of ‘negative liberalism’ in the US context. This essay should be compulsory reading for every hand wringing pro democracy ‘resistance lib’ in the polity.
Incredible synthesis of how soical democrats went from building new worlds to managing old ones. The bit about Rosselli's argument that liberalism fused itself to free-market doctrine really cuts through the confusion. I remember working in policy and realizing we were always negotiating within what seemed economically 'realistic' without ever questioning who decided what realistic meant. This captures why teh movement feels stuck between defending past wins and building something coherent for today.
The core problem we need to face and deal with is the false belief that gives rise to an economic system "capitalism", which in turn produces a governing system that is anti-democratic.
The false belief is that people who are able to acquire and accumulate ever-increasing wealth, are somehow superior to everyone else, and should be in charge of running everything. That is the core belief of capitalism, which is the economic system that our Constitution was written to protect and actively promote! While "capitalism" is not mentioned by name in the Constitution, it's core belief gave rise to our Constitution and the framework of the US government.
Most people think that our Constitution was set up to make sure we never have a king… and while that's true, it was also NOT set up to give all the power to the people as a whole. It was set up to give all the power to the wealthy NON-Royal PROPERTY OWNERS… NOT the working class… NOT the slaves… and NOT the employees... but to give that power to the EMPLOYERS!
So while our system of government was set up to guard against any Royal hierarchy, it was also guarding against any takeover by employees and slaves!
We have an Executive branch with a President who is the Commander in Chief! That means the President is part of the military and gives all the orders… a totally top down hierarchy! Nothing democratic there.
We have a Senate, which is the antithesis of democracy (set up with 2 Senators per state, so that some votes count hundreds of times more than others). I call it the UNdemocratic Senate.
We have a Supreme Court, with members who are not elected. Instead, they are appointed by the President with only the UNdemocratic Senate’s approval. It also has no way to enforce its decisions, and its justices can only be removed by agreement of both the House and the UNdemocratic Senate.
We have a House, which has no power to remove a President or Supreme Court Justice unless the UNdemocratic Senate agrees.
So our Executive branch is virtually all-powerful because the President is immune to impeachment and removal from office unless the UNdemocratic Senate (as well as the House) agree.
Therefore, the so-called "balance of power” exists in name only. There is virtually NO way to enforce it! Our Constitution ignores the fact that it is the Constitution itself that set up our electoral system, which ensure that it will ALWAYS be the richest who hold the majority of seats in all branches of our government!
This should not surprise us, since our Constitution was written by the richest adult white males in the colonies, and was written to protect their property and their right to continue hoarding more and more wealth (which at that time, included enslaved human beings, most of whom were not white, and some who... even though white…. were so poor that they had to become “indentured” to survive).
So, despite all the wonderful “equality"language of our “Proclamation of Independence”…. the ONLY humans our Constitution gave any rights to, were rich adult white males…… NOT democracy by any stretch of imagination!
If we continue to ignore and/or refuse to remedy the massively flawed assumptions that gave rise to our Constitution and economic system…. we will NEVER escape being ruled by the richest narcissists, because they are precisely who are rewarded the most under capitalism! It rewards those who are the most ruthless in raking in more and more wealth regardless of who is harmed in so doing!
I realize that many on the left are fearful that any action to rewrite our Constitution could result in the "right" rewriting it in the way they want, which would certainly not be to make it more democratic. But if you do harbor that fear, I ask you 2 questions:
1. Do you believe that to have a fair and just government, all people should have the same rights under law, and that in order for the law to be really fair and just, it must be created by a consensus (or at least a strong majority) of all the people governed?
2. If you do believe this, then why do you NOT believe that the majority of people in the USA can create a new Constitution that is truly fair and just? Why do you believe that coming together as a collective whole, for the first time in our country's history, would NOT result in an improved, fairer, and more just Constitution? In other words, if you really believe in democracy (which means you believe that as a whole, most people are fair and just) then how can you NOT believe that those same fair and just minded people would not prevail in a rewrite of the Constitution?
Bravo! A brave and compelling exegesis of the limits of ‘negative liberalism’ in the US context. This essay should be compulsory reading for every hand wringing pro democracy ‘resistance lib’ in the polity.
Incredible synthesis of how soical democrats went from building new worlds to managing old ones. The bit about Rosselli's argument that liberalism fused itself to free-market doctrine really cuts through the confusion. I remember working in policy and realizing we were always negotiating within what seemed economically 'realistic' without ever questioning who decided what realistic meant. This captures why teh movement feels stuck between defending past wins and building something coherent for today.