*Originally posted by Homer *
**
Postulate 1: The power of a fair and just Government can only derive from the will of the People to be governed.**
Fairness and justice are not necessarily correlated with the system being based on the will of the people. It is philosophically coherent to propose a theocracy that delivers fairness and justice (toa ll citizens, not just the powerful) without this being based on the will of the people. It is also philosophically coherent to propose a governement based on the will of the people that is neither fair nor just (to the minority or minorities). Off course, in the end, it depends on who decides on the criteria for ‘fairness’, ‘justice’ and 'will of the people. In post colonial America, great claims were made for fairness and justice (I believe a Mr Jefferson had a lot to say about this) but slaves counted only 3/5 in population and had few civil rights; the unpropertied in many states were also unable to vote, nor were women with property, nor were slaves. Hardly fair, just, or following the ‘will of the people’; with the caveat that it was fair, just and willed by the white, male, propertied class.
Postulate 2: The exercise of power by a fair and just Government must be of, by, and for the People.
This depends on whether the will of the people is defined by mere assent given by lack of revolt, or defined in a legalistic way (the will of the people as determined through a byzantine and unusual electoral system) or defined as the majority ruling over every single decision. Most states are governed by an amalgam of the first two systems. The last system, which may seem the fairest and most just, would often result in unfairness and unjustness for unpopular minorities.
**Postulate 3: The purpose of a fair and just Government is to protect and defend the People who have empowered the Government without restricting their personal liberties or removing from them or otherwise restricting the unalienable rights of the People who have empowered the Government. **
The purpose of most governments is, in reality, to maintain the status quo and thus the currently powerful. The concept of unalienable rights is very eighteenth century (as is much US common-sense political theory, because of the fixation on an historic document. If ‘rights’ do in fact exist, they are culturally and temporally determined and cannot therefore be ‘unalienable’. As I have noted elsewhere, were the US Constitution being drafted today by the prominent citizens of the country with the aim of protecting current best practice in Human Rights (and as ahead of its time as the founding fathers were then) it would be a very different document, and probably not in accord with the wish of the general population (as was the case when the Constitution was proposed and accepted by assent).
Postulate 4: The Government of the United States is founded on the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America.
The history of ideas in the US shows that the Governemnt of the United States has always been based on how much the basic documents can be bent, changed, ignored or cleverly contravened. In each age, the power elite have used every trick imaginable to interpret the Constitution in their own interests.
**Postulate 5: The Constitution of the United States of America is a fair and just document designed to empower a fair and just Government that acts in accordance with Postulates 1, 2, and 3. **
The Constitution of the United States of America is an eighteenth century statement of the best way to govern white males with property in a rationalistic and gentlemanly manner. Over the years it has been changed, amended and reinterpreted in order to meet the needs of the power elite of that age.
Postulate 6: The will of the Businesses have usurped the power of the Government from the People of the United States of America.
Business happens to be the current power elite
Postulate 7: The Government of the United States of America has distanced itself from the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America by disregarding the will of and protection of the People of the United States of America in the creation of it’s laws and regulations and by restricting the unalienable rights and liberties of the People of the United States of America in it’s creation of laws and regulations.
No change there then!
Postulate 8: The will of Business is self-serving in nature and therefore disregards the will of the People in pursuit of revenue.
Adam Smith was pretty certain that this was a good idea. You will find Adam Smith’s theories in the same section of the history of ideas that you will also find many of the other heroes of the founding fathers. Unfortunately, Adam Smith is more in tune with the Constitution than the Constitution is with concepts of modern democracy. Times change.
Postulate 9: A Government that no longer adheres to the principles on which it was founded is no longer directed by the will of the People.
It never was directed by the will of the people (see above). It was directed by an elite in each age who managed to gain the passive assent of the people.
Postulate 10: A Government that does not follow the will of the People is not a fair and just government.
See above on Theocracies. Fairness and Justice are not necessarily founded on the will of the people.
Postulate 11: A Government that is not fair and just does not protect the People that empowered the Government.
A government that is not fair and just may, nevertheless, protect the people that empowered it if they give their craven passive assent
Truth: Therefore, the formation of a new Government, the radical reformation of the current Government, or the reestablishment of the original Constitutional Government is imperative to restore the will of the People to its rightful position and ensure protection for the People that empower the Government.
Truth: Every government is dependent on the failure of the people to overthrow it; this is usually achieved by gaining passive assent. Eighteenth century ideas are of great interest, but of no importance. If the people are happy with what they have (or at least, not so unhappy that they wish to overthrow it) then they will have given assent. The only way that change will occur will be for a powerful and motivated group from outside the current elite (or who have separated themselves from that elite) to work towards peaceful or violent overthrow of the system of government. Of course, they’re going to have be pretty powerful to overcom the current elite, big business. IMHO we are stuck with Big Business until the eco-system is so damged that people revolt against it and replace it with another form of autocracy (which again IMHO) is the only system in reality that we have ever had anywhere- autocracy based on passive assent.
However, BTW, I concur with Winston Churchill who described Democracy as the worst form of government (saving all others) ;).
**