-7 votes

The Republican Party is Dead. The US Needs Democracy.

I'm an old guy. This isn't the first time I've mentioned that. Being an old guy means that I've seen, tried, and experienced a lot of things; more things that my younger colleagues. When I first heard of the plan to rebuild the Republican Party from the ground up, I sighed a bit. Then I promised myself to write about it after everyone else could review the experience in hindsight.

Congratulations, first of all, for the successes that took place during this election period. Local party officials were ousted and replaced with honest conservatives, worthy opponents of the two-party collusion. The success was powerful enough so that there was even a little bleed through at the Republican National Convention. After being manipulated, Maine's delegation walked out. And then there was this: Minnesota, where we are very proud of our state Republican Party, which runs a fair convention with integrity, casts 33 votes for Ron Paul, 1 vote for Senator Rick Santorum, and 6 votes for Governor Romney.

But those of you who have been paying attention (and I'm guessing that includes many who will read this article) know that most local and state conventions were not held with the same level of integrity as the Minnesota state convention. (related article: Romney Nomination May Be Contested)

......

Continue reading at original site: The Republican Party is Dead. The US Needs Democracy.

.....

This is the challenge I propose. Give the United States a multi-party system. Free it of the corruption of the two-party system. Consider the success you had during this election and start imagining movement toward constitutional amendments in the states and to the US Constitution.

To help get things rolling, I've created a Google discussion forum: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/multipartyamerica and am building a project website: https://sites.google.com/site/multipartyamerica/home. Please not that I created the forum and website just now and will continue to develop them. Feel free to join in.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Well?

Yes of course the GOP is powerful. So is the Democratic Party. The problem is, that's it. And you certainly should be seeing a problem with that now. As the article states, I'm not opposed to continued efforts to drive the criminals out of the RNC. That's ok. But what's really needed is to not have this situation where you have two corrupt parties and no democratic means of avoiding their corruption. I understand the theory that one day, with enough work, it should be possible to wrestle power away from them for a minute or two -- maybe with the right timing to slip a candidate of the people's choice past them. But that's really not good enough, don't you think? Elections should matter. We should go through an election and the people's choice should be respected. It's not a long term plan that might never work out kindof thing I'm talking about here. I'm talking about the way it's supposed to work.

Correlation does not prove causality!

IMO every single Lover of

IMO every single Lover of Liberty needs to get active. Are you party of your county GOP? What if we all went down there and flooded those committees with shear numbers?

Would you consider running for an office...any office? What if all Lover's of Liberty flooded the election process with themselves as viable candidates?

What if Lover's of Liberty were not so lazy? Pointing at me, not at you. I am guilty.

You didn't notice ....

You didn't notice that activism didn't win the day? Ron Paul people overwhelmed the system. The people in power just said NO and slammed the door. I discuss this in the article. Did you read the article?

Correlation does not prove causality!

IMO Activism IS winning the

IMO Activism IS winning the day. Why do you think the RNC cheated, lied, and stole? Because of activism. Why do you think we saw it broad as daylight? Because of activism. Why do you think we are even having this conversation? Because of activism. Why are hearts and minds being changed? Because of activism?

The corrupt RNC employed Cheap Trick for entertainment and then after the nomination had the Oak Ridge Boys sing "Amazing Grace."

The RNC actively garners support from the Christian Right while they have no idea that they are supporting Fascists. We must be active because the RNC will continue to employ their cheap tricks while those singing about amazing grace vote our country down the river.

And I am a Follower of Christ so I have every right to call it the way I see it.

Just a comment on the title.

Just a comment on the title. Democracy was specifically rejected by our Founders as its a fast path to socialism. It allows 51% to overthrow the rights of 49% of the population. What we need is a return to our Constitutional Republic where everyone, majority and minority, are held to the rule of law and decisions are not determined through mob rule.

Blessings )o(

The misunderstanding re: democracy ...

... is so common that I should have included an explanation in the article. At this point, you only needed to go to the response to the first comment after the article to save me from repeating it; or at least giving this short version.

Elections ... we have them. We even have a "House of Representatives", originally defined as a group of people who are supposed to represent us ... people who are selected by elections. It's democracy.

I did actually give a strong hint in the article, about elections. What was rejected was "pure democracy," and there is nothing in the article suggesting a transformation to that sort of system.

One final thought ... don't overlook the fact that I have not suggested abandonment of the rest of the Constitution. But do consider the fact that the Constitution never defined a two-party system.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Beat me to it.

Democracy accomplishes nothing without the rule of law and protection of personal liberties.

The need for democracy ...

... is apparent. Let me point out that the majority of Americans are "conservative" and respectful of Constitutional rule and the rule of law. Ask yourself what this season would be like if you actually had more voices in the debate, resonating and amplifying Ron Paul's message.

We have no other way, other than armed revolution, to take power back from the organized criminal gangs that currently operate the two parties. And then, as someone else pointed out, if we still only have a two-party system it's only a matter of time before they move in and take over again.

We're in a primitive state politically, in which armed revolt quickly becomes the only option. That needs to change.

Correlation does not prove causality!

"the majority of Americans are conservative"

"Let me point out that the majority of Americans are "conservative" and respectful of Constitutional rule and the rule of law."

Did you happen to see who just won the nomination?

And who our current president is?

And how well is our constitution doing right now?

Ask Anwar al-Awlaki about the rule of law.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Did you happen to notice ...

Yes, I also noticed that in 2008 Obama ran mostly as a "moderate" even making social policy speeches based on Ronald Reagan's playbook; and he ran against a left-wing nutcase in the Republican Party who seemed to favor Global Warming NWO stuff even more than he did. Now this should be emphasized this year in Romney verses Obama. Do you see an actual choice there? And if you ask me about who won the nomination again, I'm going to feel embarrassed for you. You apparently haven't been paying attention. There was more than a little fraud and manipulation in the process and the GOP just passed rules to make it easier for the established bosses to decide the nominee in the future.

You can't prove anything based on choices that people don't have. Give people a choice, and the polls have forever been telling us they'll chose more conservatively than what we've been given.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Not every Romney vote was fake, I'm sorry to say.

Tens and tens of millions of people voted for Herman Cain, Tom pawlenty, mitt romney, etc because *they legitimately thought those people would make good presidents*.

These voters claim to care about fiscal conservancy and the constitution, yet when given the choice between Ron Paul and big-government neocons, they chose the latter nearly every time. Some people are bad people, but most are just confused and really believe if we had 899 military bases instead of 900, terrorists would take over America.

Listen to talk radio. Watch fox news. Those are the so-called "rule of law respecting, constitution voters" that make up the majority of the voting bloc. Ron Paul exposed all of those people, from Sean Hannity to his lowliest listener, to be the fakes they really are.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Have you read Ron Paul's "The

Have you read Ron Paul's "The Revolution: A Manifesto"

No ...

... no I haven't. Why do you ask?

Correlation does not prove causality!

Because I haven't either but

Because I haven't either but I am getting ready to find out exactly what it says so I do not get side tracked on the effort of democracy when Liberty is what is at stake.

It's not ...

... The two are definitely not mutually exclusive.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Really?

"Let me point out that the majority of Americans are "conservative" and respectful of Constitutional rule and the rule of law."

Huh? Most Americans, north, south, east and west, don't have a clue what's in the Constitution, much less respect it. The DOE made sure of that. Where do you live?

....

I've been keeping track of polls for a number of decades. There's a reason that Romney / Ryan pretend to be conservative. There's a reason that Obama pretends to be moderate.

Here's a not so oldie but goodie along those lines ... prescription for Romney success? Pretend to be Ron Paul:

Romney's Losing Political Strategy
http://www.libertarian-examiner.com/2012/04/romneys-losing-p...

Correlation does not prove causality!

They pretend to be conservative because

fake conservative politicians are very appealing to fake conservative voters.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

On the other hand, we do not

On the other hand, we do not have a true representative system because as we all know, we have a corporatist system and our personal liberties have been eroded faster than one could say "well, there goes another freedom".

Maybe we need to have the real arguments now, before the decision is made for us by mobs or by the ascendant dictators that are coming for us, wrapped in the American flag. If there are any arguments left to be made for our Democratic Republic, make them now and make them loud, because the republic part is fast disappearing.

Yes. We need more political parties. Just like Greece.

The number of parties is not the problem. Look at Greece. They have many, many different parties, including the communist party, the nazi party, left wing anarchists, etc.

How is 3 bad parties better than 2 bad parties? There is such a blind hope that a third party will be better simply because it is a third party, that people don't even discuss the issues. Also, who is to stop this new party from being co-opted by the same power elites that control the other two parties? And why would this party catch on when there is no emphasis on what it would even stand for? The democrats and republicans have centuries of brainwashing to keep their constituencies in order. This third party, even I'd it had a platform, is lacking the underlying support of an intellectual foundation shared by a significant amount of people.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

I suggest that you ...

... read the article. I haven't suggested a 3-party system in which all three can be co-opted just like the 2 have now. With a multi-party system, the voters, i.e. The People, can decide to move entire parties out of power and other parties in. It's not up to the party bosses to decide who holds power.

The defense you give of the two-party system is right out of the two-party system handbook. I've been encountering these things for decades. How about Italy? That's another example that's often given, overlooking their overwhelming problems with organized crime. And yet, Italy survives as a "civilized nation" nonetheless.

Also, look at a whole bunch of other countries that don't have the problems of Greece (which is also not due to multi-party democracy). Sweden, England, ....

One final thought ... don't overlook the fact that I have not suggested abandonment of the rest of the Constitution. But do consider the fact that the Constitution never defined a two-party system.

Correlation does not prove causality!

Where did I defend the two party system?

I specifically called both parties bad.

Italy is a rat's nest of scandal an corruption, and economically one step behind Greece.

It doesn't matter how many parties we have. It is the ideas that matter.

Let's imagine for a moment someone creats the "super amazing 3rd party of peace and prosperity" which is cochaired by Gandhi and superman. How do you plan on convincing a minimum of 1/3 of the electorate to vote for someone who knows what needs to be done when the vast majority of the population still thinks tariffs and minimum wage laws are good?

The dangers of our government won't be stopped by more parties. In Washington, you have one party that is evil, and another that is stupid. Their definition of compromise is passing legislation that is both evil and also stupid. How much worse can it get once we have 10 wrong voices instead of two?

If some portion of the general population can't come to grips with a small handful of economic principles and learn to value their liberty, any political effort is doomed.

Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

Greece?

Aren't they bankrupt????