I'm an avid gun/gun education advocate. As such, I end up in a lot of the gun control vs firearm education debates, many of which end up with something about the Second Amendment rights. Now, before you think this is just another gun debate, think about this: in the past five, ten, twenty, a hundred years, have we really had the freedoms that the writers of the Constitution intended?
Think about it, we have the right to peaceful assembly and the right to overthrow our government, but if we tried, even peacefully, we'd be thrown in jail for treason and terrorism thanks to things like the Patriot Act.
Sadly enough, overthrowing the government is exactly what this country needs.
"We the people..."
We the people...now, that sounds like...us! The lowly citizens who can barely make ends meet while we watch the bureaucrats sit up in Washington and send our brothers, sons, sisters, friends to a war that no one will win.
So why don't we do anything about it? In the words of my husband, and many others, people are sheep. It's a proven fact that people who truly think the opposite of the majority often don't voice their opinion when they see others agree to each other. They're afraid of being wrong, or being looked down upon. They're afraid of looking foolish.
Who Really Controls This Country?
Many people agree that
Bush is a terrible leader. I personally think he's a warmonger. I think
everyone agree, if nothing else, that he's a really bad speaker. It's
not just Bush, though, or any President, for that matter, that really
control our country. It's not even Congress, the Supreme Court, or any combination of the three. It's the money, and the ones who control a lot of it.
In this case, that's not even people like Bill Gates and Donald Trump. In this case, it's groups like the Tobacco and oil industries, the ones that really fund the Government.
Did you know that average fuel efficiency has increased by only about 3 MPG since the 70s (from 18.5 to 21.5? It's not because of technological barriers, either. Tony Fini, of western New York, has several vehicles that can get upward of 100 MPG, and he was able to achieve that from tinkering with the engines in his garage, on a retired teacher's income. He's applied for grants and funding to get them off the ground, but can't get a thing. (altweeklies.com)
Did you ever notice, too, that gas prices creep up, then suddenly drop for a while when serious talk of alternative fuels and higher efficiency vehicles goes around?
Why is it that these hybrid cars that are supposed to be so good only get about 10MPG more than a Honda Civic? Why is it modified engines that run on plain gasoline but can reach 70, 80, 100MPG aren't even considered?
Did you know cartels are illegal in the United States? Princeton defines a cartel as "a consortium of independent organizations formed to
limit competition by controlling the production and distribution of a
product or service." The goal of a cartel is to create a monopoly.
Did you know OPEC is a cartel? Because it's a global cartel, though, and not based in the United States, we can't shut it down. But why do we still endorse and support them?
Did you know that we're not even on good terms with several of the countries on whom we depend for oil?
What's wrong with this picture?
The Corruption and Fall of the American Government
Okay, so I think I've established that our government is really controlled by money. Let's face it, money talks. What's the twist on the Golden Rule? Oh yes, whoever has the gold makes the rules.
While money may not necessarily be the "root of all evil," it certainly contributes to a lot of the evil in the world. Money = power, especially in a Capitalistic society, and power, as well as money, corrupts a person quite easily, particularly when combined.
So, when did people stop leading us and money started? Most likely, it was a slow process of acts and laws and amendments. It started with a few puppets to big industries, who typically didn't last more than one term, then slowly, thanks to a number of small depressions, the people with money were able to get their puppets into office and keep them there.
After the Great Depression, it was added in the Constitution that the President could only serve two terms, a tradition that was already in place (with the exception of FDR, who was also the reason for this change). Why did that get put in place? The idea was to prevent what's known in politics as a "lame duck" situation. You don't want caught in a rut, basically.
It's all well and good, and actually works quite well for the Presidency, but there's no such limit for members of Congress, and in the Supreme Court, once you're there, you're there until you die or resign. This easily and has repeatedly created "lame duck" situations because most of the Congresspeople don't get voted out unless they monumentally screw up.
So, what do you get when you combine a flock of sheep with a gaggle of lame ducks? A bunch of overpaid bureaucrats who work about a third as much as most American Citizens, yet control what goes on with the entire country.
Now, I'm not saying the individual people are corrupt or useless or evil. Many of them are probably very nice people. When you get them all together, though, is when things fall apart because, like I said before, people are sheep. You get two people that think a certain way and soon enough, the whole room can voice agreement, even if most of them don't really agree.
Now, if you're reading this and you're a steadfast Republican or Democrat, you'll probably say something along the line of "well, only {insert opposite wing here} do that!"
Please, that's a load of crap and you know it. Both the Republicans and the Democrats stand for whatever it is that will get the votes.
Everyone blamed Hoover for the Great Depression, which is why he only served one term. Chances are, the Democrats were using the Great Depression to get a Democrat into office. They were probably saying, "look what the Republicans did!" If it was, in fact the fault of the Republicans, why didn't it happen when Coolidge (also a Republican) was in office before Hoover? It had nothing to do with him being Republican, and it never has. In fact, the views of the Reps. versus the Dems, switch every couple decades or so and the definition of each party changes over time. Hell, Presidents Thomas Jefferson through John Adams were Democratic-Republicans. (Internet Public Library)
What the Constitution Says vs. How It's Interpreted
"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." First Amendment
Wow, the current government has fun curtailing this one, don't it? The issue with Roberta and Patrick Stewart come to mind for this one. Although he's not explicitly prohibiting the practice of the Wiccan religion, Bush has certainly made it clear that he doesn't view Wiccans on the same level as members of other faiths. Religious discrimination, anyone?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free
State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be
infringed."
Again, we have a case of multiple interpretations. To me, this means the exact same now as it did when this was written - a citizen army to ensure the safety of the country against herself. The NRA, while not being shut down, is being watched like a hawk, though, because the government considers it a militia, and, in my opinion, somewhat of a "threat." The increasingly strict gun laws are evidence of this.
What Would Your Father Say If He Saw This?
I think George Washington and the other writers of the constitution would be having a fit if they were alive today. Things like the Patriot Act that "protect our freedom at the cost of our freedom" would probably make them ask "what went wrong?" before forming a Militia and doing what they did 230 years ago.
So, What Do We Do About It?
I suppose that as long as it's considered high treason to do exactly what our Constitution allows us to do if we the people deem the Government too corrupt or otherwise out of hand and no longer fit to be our Government, there's not a whole lot we can do until enough people are willing to risk being accused of such a "crime" that we the people can successfully establish a new Government.
I also suppose that as long as the general public feels that since they're just middle-class, blue-collar sheep that they can't do anything, they won't do anything. The problem then, lies the fact that we the people have more power than we give ourselves credit for. The President serves us, not the other way around. Anyone who works for a company that realizes its line level employees do, in fact, make or break the company knows about this concept. The Government, especially in its current state, is nothing more than a glorified business.
It wouldn't surprise me, unfortunately, if a President pushes the wrong button with the people and awakens the real sleeping giant. I don't know about any of you who read this, but I know a few dozen people in the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains who, individually, have enough firearms to outfit a small battalion and have the skills to take one out.
As George Orwell put it in 1984 - "If there was hope, it must lie in the proles..."
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
