The founding fathers had put together a form of government under a “Constitution” that—-up until that time—-was unheard of. It has also been argued that the Magna Carta was the beginning, with that document focusing on property rights and/or the ability to own property at all levels of the civil structure. With the Constitution we had what we would like to think was a Republic under law—with a control of government through a separation of powers in 3 different branches of government. This Republic formed a control through “We the People” a democracy of control by the people and for the people with most powers proposed to pass from the Federal Government, down to the States.
States’ rights, nullification, and secession developed primarily from a profound conviction that an economic system and way of life of a minority were endangered by a political majority. This idea was argued rather strongly with Madison recognizing the problem in the “Federalist #51”—–“If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure.” John C. Calhoun (1782-1850) argued the same point all his life—–in his “A Disquisition of Government” and many of his speeches—like “The Fort Hill Address” On the relations of the States and Federal Government July 26, 1831.
This is a brief couple of sentences on back ground so I can jump quickly to today and the Republican primary and what I think most—-if not “All” are missing when trying to say what is wrong with the scenario of Trump and the rest—I include the Democrats Clinton and Sanders.
These next couple of paragraphs will seem disjointed but hopefully it makes sense as you think on it, even as the political process, with its people change.
I will be quoting extensively from “Magna Carta and Property” (1965) Gottfried Dietze——I wish to give all credit to the author and his book for opening my eyes of thought and my understanding to what I think is the problem in today’s political arena.
The book Magna Carta and Property is short book—-having 83 pages and 183 foot notes.
I quote from two foot notes:
(Footnote 176—pg. 79) Mussolini was appointed Prime Minister by the king on Oct. 30, 1922 and obtained a 306 to 116 vote of confidence in the Chamber of Deputies on Nov. 18. A week later that Chamber granted him plenary powers by a vote of 275 to 90.”
(Footnote 178—pg. 79) Hitler was appointed Chancellor by President Hindenburg on Jan. 30, 1933. He received plenary powers through the Enabling Act of March 24 by a vote of 441 to 94 with no votes being cast by 81 Communists and 26 Socialist who were in jail or in hiding.
Here is a few sentences of the closing section of “Concluding Remarks” which starts on page 74 finishing on 83. (see below) These closing pages summarize what has happen to the Democratic process here in the USA. You can see from the above footnotes that it appears both Mussolini and Hitler received power through a voting process—that voting process is about to take place here and it will be called a Democratic process.
Mr. Donald Trump has taken hold, as a phenomenon, that has made him out to be some kind of savior of the government and country—he is exactly what the people want to have or see come on to the scene—as shown by the reaction of the people. I would suspect both Mussolini and Hitler were received in the Voting Chambers in the same fashion. This consolidation of power by something that is so powerful (Alfa type personalities) it will dominate the arena and keep the citizens off balance and in the weeds of confusion as to what the real issues are. It cannot be argued against—–that these figures on stage—–are dominating and have changed the focus of what is happening. If the elements of “Why” and “What” is happening are changed—–into buzz words like “Liberty and Conservative” guiding the process and confusing the issue to the point that the process fails and/or it allows something to happen that has happen in past history.
I recommend you find a copy of Gottfried Dietze‘s Book “Magna Carta and Property”—–I did at the Bethlehem Library through inter-library own.
I quote below—read it carefully—keep in mind it was written in 1965—-some 50 years ago:
“The arrival of strong executives in democracies is not surprising. Once sheer majority rule is admitted, the rule of a strong man controlling the majority cannot easily be prevented. Often the majority may be a mere tool in his hands. He will sway and wield its members as he see fit and force them into submission. Although a leader may rise with the sanction, of the majority and head the drive against the minority, in the end he may whip the majority into line and drive its members into servility. This development is quite natural. Once the basic inviolability of the individual’s liberties has been questioned, a potential dictator can hardly be expected to respect the rights of those belonging to the majority. He is like to do by majority as the majority under his leadership did by the minority. Needless to say, at this stage democracy ceases…”
I leave you to ponder Professor Dietze’s words and ask the question—Are we asking the right question? Are we on the right path? Are we going in the right direction?
For those of you that know of the—–PA. School Property Tax Elimination Act (HB 76–SB 76) and its failing let me ask this question—-Does not school property taxation violate the very essences and spirit of the Magna Carta—-it cut to the core of the home being man’s Castle and taxation should not be able to take ones home by government action under some law.
We Shall See—what the political process brings—don’t you think?