what changes through-out our history brought us to where we are now with corperations and lobbist making our laws instead of the every day man like back in the birth of our country
2007-02-13 08:37:01 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It should be updated to say "by the privileged few to undermine the many."
2007-02-13 08:40:23 · answer #1 · answered by Jackson Leslie 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Look up the word REPUBLIC in most any dictionary. Most likely, you"ll find that a "republic" is a "government of elected representatives".
This is a deliberate deception.
The Enclycopaedia Britannica, 11th edition has the correct definition. First it says that the idea that a republic is a government of elected representatives is a "notoriously modern interpretation". The article continues, explaining that historically, a Republic refered to a government in which the soverign held authority granted by the people and ruled according to law.
Note that this concept checks exactly with our own Declaration of Independence which states that the purpose of government is to protect the rights of the people, and that government derives its just powers from the consent of the people.
You now have the key ideas in hand: First, power is derived from the people, and second the government itself operates within and under the control of the law. In other words: In a REPUBLIC the People are the Masters and the government is subordinate.
When the Founding Fathers set our Constitution for us they based their work on this concept. The Constitution is a grant of authority from We the People to form a government. The government thus authorized is a LIMITED government, operating on authority granted from We the People. In every sense it meets the earlier, historical definition of a Republic.
The Constitution is the grant of authority for the government. The Constitution, then, is the Law of the People for the control of the Government.
You will hear many people say that we are a "democracy". Such was NOT the original intention. In a democracy, the will of the majority is law. Anything is allowed, provided that the majority approves. There are no checks and balances, and the rights of the individual are not protected.
Allow me two quotations on the subject:
James Madison, Federalist Paper 10:
"Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
U.S. Army Training Manual TM2000-05, 1928
Democracy, n. "A government of the masses. Authority derived through mass meeting or any form of "direct" expression. Results in mobocracy. Attitude toward property is communistic - negating property rights. Attitude toward law is that the will of the majority shall regulate, whether it be based upon deliberation or governed by passion, prejudice, and impulse, without restraint or regard to consequences. Results in demagogism, license, agitation, discontent, anarchy."
Our Constitutional fathers, familiar with the strength and weakness of both autocracy and democracy, with fixed principles definitely in mind, defined a representative republican form of government. They made a very marked distinction between a republic and democracy ... and said repeatedly and emphatically that they had created a republic.
2007-02-13 08:42:47 · answer #2 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It started with the Federal Reserve. Our monetary system was handed over to a few private Bankers. In my opinion that was the beginning of the loss of control by the people and the rule of a select few .
2007-02-13 08:43:36 · answer #3 · answered by blackdahiliamurder 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Greed
2007-02-13 08:48:11 · answer #4 · answered by jl_jack09 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You said it your self. lobbying. Lobbyists contributions to campaigns should be outlawed and the practice along with bribery of a federal official should constitute treason. punishable by execution.
My reasoning is that these practices subvert the "by the people for the people" principle.
2007-02-13 08:42:21 · answer #5 · answered by gorg515 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
For one thing the 2000 shamlection and the 1-20-01 Tragedy.
2007-02-13 08:40:36 · answer #6 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
When the people quit voting and plugged their brains into entertainment. More people voted for the finalist on "American Idol"(itry) than voted for president.
We have gotten fat, lazy and self absorbed.
American culture is pathetic.
2007-02-13 08:55:18 · answer #7 · answered by GJ 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Leftists redefined the Constitution as a "living, breathing document" thereby removing the legal restraints against government power and collaboration with special interests. They also worked to get their activist judges in the highest levels of the court so they could redefine the meaning of laws to suit their agendas.
If we can restore the written meaning of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, we may be able to fix this situation. Expect a lot of resistance.
2007-02-13 08:40:12 · answer #8 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 1⤊ 5⤋
Corporations and lobbyists are people too. The masses simply lack the will to exert their influence.
2007-02-13 08:47:22 · answer #9 · answered by Aegis of Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Congressmen putting their greed ahead of their constituents.
2007-02-13 08:42:18 · answer #10 · answered by snowball45830 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋