Why Democracy?

& Protecting It

Under alternative forms of government such as autocracy, oligarchy, theocracy, etc., and various variants thereof, a small minority runs the country, the nation.  In a democracy, the government belongs to the people.  

Democracies are inclusive.  The people choose and depose the leaders. It is thus that everyone has a voice in decision-making. A voice — not my way or I’ll tear the house down.  

Democracy is government by consensus, the consensus of the people.

In democracies, the people are sovereign.  The kingdom never belonged to the king; it was stolen from the people, was always a nation that belonged to the people.  That ownership is sacrosanct.  Belongs to those who fought and died to defend it; who did the work, do the work — to we the people.  We the people, the nation, who work for ourselves and each other.    In a democracy, the leaders work for the people, not vice versa. 

Democracies empower the people.

Democracies are nations of laws.  Not morals, or beliefs, but laws. 

Democracy was a natural form of government common in early societies.  Forms of government, democracy, evolve as does the thinking about what government is, what its role is, and how to make democracy work better.  

For all these reasons and more, no other form of government is nearly as good.

—

The US Constitution’s preamble declares that ‘we the people’ are sovereign. The declaration itself was a huge evolutionary step in governance, a veritable testament that our thinking about governance does evolve; one portending further evolution in this thinking — portending, perhaps, that the next logical evolutionary step is thinking that the people are not only sovereign, but are the nation in all ways.

It is the thinking that is evolving.  At this point, (for the reasons listed above and more) democracy seems to be our best bet, our best hope; where the focus should be.  It will be as good as we make it.  If, in the meanwhile, a superior form of governance, of thinking thereon, should emerge — yes, by all means.  Unless and until then, our thinking should focus on ways to protect and improve democracy.

Because democracies are of ‘we the people’, they are constantly under attack, threat of attack, by interests who don’t find them to be in their interests.  Therefore, they must be protected by an unbreakable, inviolable, unassailable constitution.  One whereby any threat to democracy is quickly squelched.  Political and public hirelings that violate the constitution are to be promptly prosecuted, and removed and dismissed — imprisoned, if warranted.   Any person or persons guilty of scheming to violate the constitution, threatening democracy in any manner, shall be stripped of their freedom and property.  Such acts are most grievous crimes against the people, the nation.  Democracy can not be left to chance.

Currently, and for some time, our democracy has been under a particularly grave threat by a consortium of interests who see democracy, the evolution of thinking about governance, and progress itself, as threats to their interests.  Collectively, over the past fifty-plus years, they have mounted a well planned, well executed attack that shredded the very protections we had been taught, believed would withstand such threats.

Checks and balances mean nothing when you have congressional and Supreme Court majorities who do not believe in democracy, who, for whatever reasons, say our way or we shall tear the house down.  Not since the lead-up to the Civil War have we seen a major party put loyalty and fealty above the national interests; so anti-democratic, so opposed to progress.  Has there ever been a Supreme Court majority so opposed to democracy?  To progress?  So transparently partisan?  So transparently corrupt?

Corruption is the death knell of democracies (of all governments).  To protect democracy, public office holders suspected of corruption shall be immediately suspended and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

None of the current Supreme Court majority should have been nominated, let alone confirmed.  All are tools of anti-democratic interests.  Supreme Court justices must be non-partisan, scholars of the highest caliber, and of good character.

People who do not believe in democracy, in government, should not be in Congress.  

—

Whereas Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Madison, Washington, Mason, et al had limited historical information at their disposal in their quest for means to constitutionally protect democracy; we have their work plus tons of fresh data from a well-planned, well-executed assault on democracy and constitutional protections.  We have witnessed the Koch Brothers & progeny, Heritage Foundation, Federalist Society, white nationalists, and Christian Right in action.

It is a consequence of their actions that we now have congressional and Supreme Court majorities who do not believe in democracy. We now know where changes are needed; where the loopholes that need plugging and defenses that need shoring up are (or at least some of them).  We need to figure out how to do it.  

In Philadelphia, in 1787, with about ten years experience and limited historical precedence to draw on, over a short period (of less than six months), they produced a document that held anti-democratic interests at bay for more than two hundred forty years.  Well done.

Jefferson, Washington, and Hamilton, each in their own way and for different reasons, feared the rise of a demagogue.  Madison, Adams, and Mason also feared the demagogue.  They also knew that democracies had to be protected against autocrats, oligarchs, theocrats, etc.  Together, the Convention came up with checks and balances.  Checks and balances have proven to be inadequate protection against the demagogue, autocrats, oligarchs, theocrats, etc..  

— Democracies must be protected against any and all demagogues, autocrats, oligarchs, theocrats, etc.; need an unbreakable, inviolable, unassailable constitution that can’t be co-opted by any and all anti-democratic interests by any means. —

The wealthy and some religious sects see democracy as a threat — have good reason to.  They have good reason to be resistant to the evolution of thinking; to the progression of thinking.  Democracies must be protected from both.  The separation of church and state and of wealth and state must be unbreakable, inviolable, unassailable.  The breakdown of this separation facilitated the circumvention of the checks and balances of the Constitution, the full-scale attack on democracy we are witnessing.

One of the biggest loopholes (or wormholes) taken advantage of by these two interest groups was our system for choosing candidates for political office.  The US Constitution doesn’t mention political parties, nor does it speak to the process by which candidates for federal office are chosen.  It only lists minimum qualifications for the offices of president and Congress; botches the ‘electoral college’.   Constitutions should address matters of such importance with specificity , should ensure that the people’s voices are heard.  Should require that candidates for political office meet the highest standards; be well qualified. Should ensure equal representation for the selection of candidates, for elections.  Should ensure one man, one vote — with all votes equal.  Should declare that neither money, wealth nor corporations are people.  Should define the role, if any, of political parties.

While autocracies, oligarchies, theocracies, and the like are the very antithesis of democracy; with adequate constitutional safeguards, there could possibly be democratic socialism, communism, capitalism, market capitalism, … .    Democracy is a form of governance that could incorporate economic or social models such as these as long as they do not threaten democracy.