Topic: Politics
Essence of Freedom The answer is quite simple. Though, not easily applied. It is a mere application of ballot access. In order to get this instated, the sitting duopoly has to legislate this allowance of access. They see this allowance as an end to their squandering of our rights and liberties.by Darrell Dillard
(libertarian)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
In the days of our founding we had enlightened trust in a select few. They were freedom dwellers from the various classes social grace. One and all, the calling of such liberty could only be sought through representation. Representative government was platformed as the method of establishing this great nation.
The founders knew that a pure Democracy could not withstand the human element of self-preservation. Hence, it is the establishment of a Republic, based on democratic values. Yes, a Representative Republic. Thus, allowing for the nation to thrive, unheeded to the present times.
Many do not understand the difference between a Democracy and a Republic. In a Democracy the simple majority overwhelms that of the minority. Therefore the protections of those, in the minority, are absconded in the absence of their rights. The Republic is a representative government governed by a constitution. The Constitution is written and adopted by the people.
"Ours is a representative republic with a Constitution in which is recognized the natural law and the natural rights of man. It is a republic with a spiritual foundation characterized by freedom -- freedom for the individual and for his society."
--Ezra Taft Benson
Our representative system has developed into a "two-party" tyranny. This can be seen in the actions of our elected officials towards that of the citizen. They see the seat as an authority to overlook the people's redress of grievance. The First Amendment of the United States Constitution, as instituted in the Bill of Rights, grants this right of redress.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
This duopoly has become the detriment that our founders tried to warn against. They are the despotic version of the very reason for our founding. In a sort, they have become like that of King George III. Under their oversight we have fallen to a mere pittance of our origins.
The "Grand Republic" is rapidly losing its luster as the majesty of freedom. The need for reform has never been more evident. The corruption of this duopoly has smeared the Constitution with a dense fog of banishment. We cannot allow for this measure of disparity. This act of reformation is a duty and responsibility of every "Citizen Sovereign".
You might ask, "How do we reform our government?"
The answer is quite simple. Though, not easily applied. It is a mere application of ballot access. In order to get this instated, the sitting duopoly has to legislate this allowance of access. They see this allowance as an end to their squandering of our rights and liberties. In their eyes, they would relinquish their self-aggrandized authority, by doing so. Therefore, it is your duty to notify them that you will no longer allow for their abuse of power.
The legitimacy of ballot access only shows light on our call of freedom. It is truly the very essence of liberty. It would allow for a true representative election. Choice is reason enough to give voice to your governing body. The Citizen Sovereign will render their need for representative government, through measures of reform. Thus, this reform will be that of the voice, and not through uncivil strife. The peaceful reformation will give heed to the people.
George Washington summarized the essence of this freedom in his farewell address.
"The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries, which result, gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of Public Liberty."
"REFORM, REFORM, REFORM!"
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 3 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of Darrell Dillard only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Darrell Dillard is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Nice topical article. Of course the first part of your article didn't mention that all those "founding father" rights and constitution, etc. did not apply for women, blacks, those who did not own property. So, it did take some maturity, development and modernity to correct the "false" application of those great and high ideals.
In my opinion we collectively, and individually have never had more rights in our history, whether we all exercise them or not is another question, but im curious as to what freedoms have we lost or that you wish to regain from what we had in 1820, 1850, 1900, 1920, etc. ?? (of course- black Americans and women excepted right- because the founding fathers didn't offer them many of those rights and freedoms.)
In response to the comment by James Luko, I would first like to take a moment to thank the reader for taking time to read my article. The question, "...what freedoms have we lost or that you wish to regain from what we had in 1820, 1850, 1900, 1920, etc?"
Let me just say that it is not the direct loss of freedom, but the imminent loss that will inevitably overcome the freedom of choice. Without ballot access, we do not have the free selection of choice. This can only be summarized as a hindrance on the system as that of taxation without equal representation. There can only be equal representation when there is more of a choice in our election process. An example would be that of a car dealership. If you were shopping for a vehicle, and there were two dealerships. One dealership only had two models of cars, while the other had a wider variety (let's just say 10 models). Which one would you go to, unless you would just prefer to be usurped into a car of the dealers choice, instead of one in your own selection.
That is the true platform of my article. Remember, it is just "One Man's Opinion". I hope that answers the question of the loss of freedom. Thank you.
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
