US Politics: I Pledge Allegiance to the...

[sologdin]

acton's maxim is more classical liberal than anarchist, no? "corruption" is not a concept that the left should endorse.

the charge of ochlocracy is similarly something that the left should avoid. it is an aristocrat/objectivist/burkean concept.

OAR--

states may condemn "derelict" homes in order to seize them and distribute to cappies for commercial development, such as kelo v. city of new london, 545 US 469 (2005), which is a case that gets scot's hackle up more than wickard.

ETA--ha. ninjaed!

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Sologdin,

By the end of the "Reign of Terror" the Paris mob was killing people just because they liked the spectical. That seems pretty close to "ochlocracy". Not to mention the "War in the Vendee".

[grumdin]

Certainly there are examples of mob violence and abuses, but I doubt we could really come up with an example from history of mob rule that has matched the most tyrannical dictatorial or aristocratic governments.

However, to your question, the only limits that should be placed on democratic action are those actions which would limit democracy. Despite being wildly undemocratic in its structures, the Constitution gets a lot of this right in the Bill of Rights. Free speech, assembly, association, conscience are clearly necessary to democracy. A principle of equal treatment under law (due process, no bills of attainder) is clearly necessary to prevent reprisals against political opponents or specific minority groups, which would stifle opposition and be undemocratic.

Problem with majortairianism, it's not the majority who produce wealth. Though I accept the popularity of offering free stuff for no work.

[sologdin]

I need a good volume on the french revolution, dammit, because I don't know much about it, other than the construction put on it by herr marx.

that said, were the killings the acts of a riot, i.e., non-state actors, or was it state action? if the former, the charge of ochlocracy can only be figurative. I wouldn't mind seeing an example of a literal ochlocratic state. laboratory of history and all that.

ETA--

not the majority who produce wealth

I love this. of course people who actually work don't "produce" the wealth; that function is reserved for the owners. but that objection aside, wtf does this coarse randian proposition have to do with democracy?

[grumdin]

I need a good volume on the french revolution, dammit, because I don't know much about it, other than the construction put on it by herr marx.

that said, were the killings the acts of a riot, i.e., non-state actors, or was it state action? if the former, the charge of ochlocracy can only be figurative. I wouldn't mind seeing an example of a literal ochlocratic state. laboratory of history and all that.

ETA--

not the majority who produce wealth

I love this. of course people who actually work don't "produce" the wealth; that function is reserved for the owners. but that objection aside, wtf does this coarse randian proposition have to do with democracy?

I totally agree with you it's a hell of a stretch to describe revolutionary France as an anarchical state, in fact there's never been a more petty rule making state in human history. More like the mob was ruled in the same way the Roman Emperors used it. The closest thing we've gotten to a ochlocracy would be Somalia.

And no I was making no commentary or comaprison of labor and capital, and I was giving wealth the meaning Marxists ascribe to it. I'm not 100% sure if you're a proper Marxist or a mushy modern progressive, respect to the former as at least you can think in a structured manner.

[awesome possum]

Aww, looks like I missed some fun times in the last thread. Please tell me our lovely little anti-semite troll has been handed a vacation.

Anyway, a jury has awarded a family $3 million for the health issues caused by fracking on their property. That's the good news. The bad news is its in Texas, is being appealed by the company, and thus will go to any number of the judges that are likely already in the pockets of Big Oil/Gas.

The Parr family had sued Aruba Petroleum Inc. in 2011, alleging the oil and gas producer exposed them to hazardous gases, chemicals and industrial waste that seeped into the air from 22 wells drilled near the family’s 40-acre plot of land, which sits atop the Barnett Shale.

The jury returned a 5-1 verdict saying Aruba “intentionally created a private nuisance,” awarding $275,000 for losses on property value, $2 million for past physical pain and suffering, $250,000 for future physical pain and suffering, and $400,000 for mental anguish.

Maybe its just the tree-hugger inside me but it seems like there may be no greater evil being done to our local environments right now than fracking.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

OAR,

See, Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005) for the relevant US case law and extensive discussion on the taking of private property by the State to transfer to other private entities.

After an admittedly very cursory glance at wikipedia, here's my take: no, I see no reason that a democratic state should be constitutionally prohibited from taking a similar action (which is not to speak to the question of whether under the US constitution it is or isn't). If the public via democratic processes decides 'economic growth' is public use, then it is.

However, I would be strongly opposed to transferring property from one private party to another. My preference is to move away from private production so I wouldn't be interested in facilitating 'economic growth' via a giveaway to private developers. I also strongly suspect that in a true democracy you'd be far less likely to see this kind of thing go on- I think we get this kind of thing from because we don't have a true democracy, and instead tend mostly to get policies that favor the well-propertied and thusly powerful.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

OAR,

I'm going to ask the obvious question, how do you define and describe a "true democracy"?

[awesome possum]

This guy asks a good question: with Republicans - at the behest of their rich overlords - trying to strangle solar power, where is the tea party and libertarian outrage?

On Monday, Oklahoma’s Republican Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill passed by the GOP-controlled Legislature that authorizes electric utilities to tack a surcharge on the bills of private citizens who have installed solar panels or wind turbines on their homes. That’s right, Oklahomans who have spent money to generate their own clean and green power now must pay compensation to the power companies.

This sounds a bit like government trampling on the independence of the citizenry. You’d think the tea party would be protesting and militia groups would be riding in with guns drawn. But since it is Republicans and big business doing the trampling, there is, as yet, no outcry from the libertarian crowd.

[TerraPrime]

This guy asks a good question: with Republicans - at the behest of their rich overlords - trying to strangle solar power, where is the tea party and libertarian outrage?

They need some group of white dudes with guns. Then the Libertarians will mobilize. Until then, pipe down.

[Galactus]

Here's some words from that Bundy guy:

“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro,” he said. Mr. Bundy recalled driving past a public-housing project in North Las Vegas, “and in front of that government house the door was usually open and the older people and the kids—and there is always at least a half a dozen people sitting on the porch—they didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do.

“And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do?” he asked. “They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/24/us/politics/rancher-proudly-breaks-the-law-becoming-a-hero-in-the-west.html?hp&_r=0

It's kind of sad really.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Solution: rename solar panels Reagan Panels. The Republicans will then support them unquestioningly.

(And everyone will conveniently forget that Reagan took down the solar panels on the White House).

[The Anti-Targ]

It's interesting that the Pledge is one of the few cases where an action of Congress explicitly added religious wording something. That, in my opinion, is an explicit rather than an implicit violation of the establishment clause.

"Congress shall make no law regarding the establishment of religion." That's exactly what it did in adding "Under God" to the pledge. Not that the pledge is any less a blind loyalty oath without "under God".

Depends what is meant by establishment of religion. God isn't a religion as it means something different to every person and the pledge doesn't establish which version of God is being pledged. If the pledge said "under God as we know him through our lord and saviour Zoroaster" then that would be establishing Zoroastrianism as the state religion, but plain "God" does not establish religion.

Not that I'm defending the pledge. As an outsider I think it is totally weird, the sort of thing totalitarian dictatorships force on people to indoctrinate them into subservience.

[The Marquis de Leech]

God is a religious entity. It doesn't matter whether Odin or Zeus or Yahweh is being referred to: it is religion, and a so a violation of the boundaries between Church and State.

(Speaking of which, we really need to get around to scrapping the prayer session at the opening of Parliament).

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

AP, TP,

That's the first I've heard of the stupid surcharge idea. It needs to be opposed. It reminds me if forcing people on to city water who are perfectly happy with their wells.

[OnionAhaiReborn]

OAR,

I'm going to ask the obvious question, how do you define and describe a "true democracy"?

Rule by the people, with equal say and sway for each individual. As to what structures are most conducive to that end, big picture I think the best way to go about it is to have proportional representation with shared agenda setting power (all parties get to propose legislation and have it voted on), allowing for shifting coalitions depending on the issue which should give the most accurate representation of the public's preference on every issue. Open access to information and complete government transparency is also crucial- permitting government secrecy results in an undemocratic knowledge asymmetry.

That's a short version, anyway. It's also very important to protect against intimidation by private powers and money would have to be eliminated from elections. And I'm sure truly honing in on fair and equal participation and access would require reform to come into contact with reality and recognize further needed reforms as the need arose.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

OAR,

How do you prevent tryranny of 50.01% of the populus over the remaining 49.99 in your system?

[DanteGabriel]

Solution: rename solar panels Reagan Panels. The Republicans will then support them unquestioningly.

(And everyone will conveniently forget that Reagan took down the solar panels on the White House).

Go for the double-whammy and start referring to the electric companies' power lines as "black power lines" and watch the Teahadis turn.

Also, fair warning for Grumdin: recent comments made by America's Most Heroic Freeloading Squatter Cliven Bundy make it a fairly slam-dunk case that he is, in fact, a racist, and I will make free use of that description in further posts on the topic. Of course you seem to have dropped your very vocal support for him now as well...

[Jaxom 1974]

Ramsey,

I'm always surprised by the very harsh and negative reaction to not saying the pledge. Are advanced civics really that difficult to understand?

Are basic civics, let alone advanced, even tought with any regularity in school anymore?

[TerraPrime]

Are basic civics, let alone advanced, even tought with any regularity in school anymore?

Better question: "Are basic civics, let alone advanced, even practiced with any regularity at homes any more?"