This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Do We Need Politicians, Or Can We Cut Out the Middleman?
American Politicians Are Bought and Paid For
Virtually all independent economists and financial experts agree that the economy cannot stabilize or recover unless the giant, insolvent banks are broken up (and here and here). And the very size of the big banks is also warping our entire political system.
Politicians are wholly bought and paid for. As famed trend forecaster Gerald Celente writes in the current Trends Journal:
Politics today is little more than legalized prostitution. While a streetwalker gets busted for selling her body to a john, politicians get rewarded with campaign contributions for selling their souls to a corporation or lobbyist. With all of the whoring going on – the money exchanged and the pleasures lavished – the only one actually getting screwed was John Q. Public.
But the chairman of the Department of Economics at George Mason University (Donald J. Boudreaux) says that calling politicians prostitutes is inaccurate – because it is being too nice. Specifically, Boudreaux says that it is more correct to call politicians “pimps”, since they are pimping out the American people to the financial giants.
So the state of banking and politics in America is grim, indeed. But do we really even need banks or politicians? Or can we cut out the middle man?
This post looks at whether we can use Direct Democracy to cut out the corrupt political middleman. In a separate essay, we look at whether we can use alternative financial arrangements to cut out the big banks as financial middleman.
Do We Need Politicians … Or Can We Cut Out the Corrupt Middleman?Gerald Celente writes in this month’s Trends Journal:
For some years we’ve been seeing the promising stirrings of a global Renaissance; a “new order” that would reject the gross materialism, excessive consumerism and glorified militarism that has dominated contemporary western societies. But each initiative undertaken to retrofit and change the failing system has had its momentum blocked or sabotaged by the entrenched agents of “no change.”
***
Therefore, I’ve come to the conclusion that the only solution is to take that control from the handful of “them” – the power possessors and power brokers – and put the power into the hands of the people. But how?
***
I propose … of Direct Democracy – a potentially globe-changing movement that would replace today’s “representative democracy.” Positive change will not and cannot occur until power is taken away from the power obsessed.
While, in 2011, no one would dream of reinstituting the divine right of kings, what is passed off today as “Democracy” is little more than a structure to clandestinely
support an ersatz nobility that perpetuates that very divine right practice.
The Direct Democracy solution I propose will not only transfer power to the public (for better or for worse!), it will make “we the people” fully responsible for creating the future. The choice is stark. Either we take action to create our destiny, or others will continue to create it for us … and judging by past performance, we’re not
going to like what they create.
***
Regardless of who is elected – Republican or Democrat – the only solution I can see at this time that could save America (and be applied worldwide) is to take the power out of the hands of politicians and put it into the hands of the people.
In Switzerland, where this is practiced, it is called “Direct Democracy.” The people vote on major issues that affect them locally and globally, and the elected officials (whether they agree or not) perform their duties as “public servants,” carrying out the will of the people.
The US and other nations that call themselves “democratic” have “representative democracy.” In theory, elected officials pledged to carry out (represent) the will of the people. But, in practice, at least in modern memory, most elected officials carry out the will of special interests whose “campaign contributions” (a.k.a. bribes and payoffs) assure their subservience. While most everybody knows this, it’s both tolerated and accepted as political business as usual.
***
Given today’s dire socioeconomic and geopolitical conditions and our forecast for them to dramatically deteriorate, I believe that changing from a faux-representative democracy to Direct Democracy would be a giant step in the right direction. If the Swiss can do it successfully, why can’t anyone else?
***
WHERE TO START Understanding the tremendous power that social networking played in galvanizing the revolutions of the “Arab Spring” and the uprisings and protests raging through Europe, I propose using the same model to bring about a Direct Democracy revolution.
***
It should never be forgotten that no law is immutable. Laws are made only to be superseded by new laws. No clearer example can be given than the wholesale raping of the Constitution by the Supreme Court and successive presidents. What better time to write a new one? If the Founding Fathers could pull it off with horses, sheer will and quill pens, surely 21st century revolutionaries can make Direct Democracy a reality with the strokes of a keyboard. Not only can the Internet serve as the galvanizing force
to bring about Direct Democracy, it can also be used as the 21st century ballot box.
“Voting online could be subject to hacking and fraud,” the entrenched parties will argue. But casting a vote online is no more susceptible to “irregularities” than casting a vote at the polling place … be it stuffing the ballot boxes or rigging the voting machines.
In fact, voting online, with full transparency, would prove more secure than any polling place run by party operatives. I say, “If you can bank online, buy online, gamble on line, you can vote online!” Going to vote should be easier than going to the ATM. And if you don’t have your own computer, there’s always the polling place.
It is due time Thomas Jefferson’s vision that “… in due time the voice of the people will be heard and their latent wisdom will prevail,” prevails.
***
Publisher’s Note: “Representative Democracy,” the form of government we adhere to in the West, is no more than a cruel sham, a bone thrown to the proles following the overthrow of the aristocracies of the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. The restive public was gulled into believing that, by voting for members of political parties pledged to represent their interests, their voices would be heard.
While attractive in principle, in practice, political parties come to represent the same very rich and very powerful interests that have ruled throughout history. Only the names and ranks have changed. No longer called Kings, Queens, Czars, Dukes and Barons, the new aristocracy is called the “too big to fail.”
***
Thinking people everywhere are recognizing that Direct Democracy can provide a blueprint for revolution in the New Millennium. Non-violent, intellectually and philosophically sound, emotionally empowering, and potentially inexorable … the greatest obstacle to Direct Democracy is to do nothing.
Celente also includes in his latest newsletter an article on direct democracy from Thomas H. Naylor. Naylor is Professor Emeritus of Economics at Duke University. For thirty years, he taught economics, management science, and computer science at Duke. As an international management consultant specializing in strategic management, Dr. Naylor has advised major corporations and governments in over thirty countries.
Naylor writes:
Taking note of the unsustainable, unfixable, gridlock nature of the US government and its inability to fix the American economy, Gerald Celente has proposed that the United States turn to Swiss-style Direct Democracy as an alternative way to resolve such divisive issues as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the magnitude of the government’s budget deficit, how to finance health care, the size of the defense budget, and national immigration policy. He envisions this being carried out on the Internet.
***
Over the past 700 or so years Switzerland has developed a unique social and political structure, with a strong emphasis on federalism and Direct Democracy….
Switzerland has a coalition government with a rotating presidency, in which the president serves for only one year. Many Swiss do not know who of the seven Federal Councillors in the government is the president at any given time, since he or she is first among equals. In Switzerland a petition signed by 100,000 voters can force a nationwide vote on a proposed constitutional change and the signatures of only 50,000 voters can force a national referendum on any federal law passed by Parliament.
Among the high profile issues that have been resolved by Swiss national referendums are women’s voting rights, abortion rights, creation of a new canton, abolition of the army, and Swiss membership in the League of Nations, United Nations, World Bank, IMF, and the European Union.
***
Most political scientists agree that the Swiss have taken the concept of democracy to levels heretofore unattainable any place else in the world. In his excellent book Direct Democracy in Switzerland (Transaction Publishers, 2002), Gregory Fossedal describes Switzerland as “a Direct Democracy, in which, to an extent, the people pass their own laws, judge the constitutionality of statutes, and even have written, in effect, their own constitution.” That’s a lot!
All of this is in stark contrast to the United States in which our government is owned, operated, and controlled by Wall Street, Corporate America, the Pentagon, and domestic and foreign lobbies. Whereas the primary role of Swiss Direct Democracy is to protect the Swiss people from the Swiss government, the US government is more concerned with protecting its powerful clients from the will of the American people. In Switzerland the people own their government. In the
United States the government owns us.
[Given how much larger the U.S. is than Switzerland, and our different politicial system, it would be challenging to institute Direct Democracy in the U.S.]
But the alternative is a nation whose government has lost its moral authority and is tightly controlled by a self-serving military/industrial/congressional complex accountable only to itself – a nation that has become unsustainable economically, militarily, socially, environmentally, and politically. The United States is so large that it may no longer be governable and has possibly become unfixable.
If there is a way out of our nation’s death spiral, Direct Democracy just might be one of our last remaining viable options. We could do a lot worse than emulate the Swiss.
If American politicians have become so corrupt that they are beyond redemption, maybe we should use Direct Democracy to cut out the middleman.
And see this analysis by Yves Smith of how the direct democracy-like process involved in the Wall Street protests is one of its greatest strengths.
Wouldn’t Direct Democracy Lead to Mob Rule?Some have expressed concern that direct democracy would lead to “mob rule”. In response to such fears, Gerald Celente responds:
Mob Rule? That’s precisely what we have now. The Wall Street Mob Rules. The Republican and Democrats? They’re nothing more than the White Shoe Boyz version of the Gambino’s and Bonnano’s.
Mob rule? “We the People” are too stupid to think for ourselves? What self respecting individual would look up to a House of Weiners to make life and death decisions for them? A Congressional Gang of 535 controlling the lives of 312 million … that’s mob rule!
We’re too stupid? We should bend over and suck up to The Gang of 535 … the DC Drama Queens and the Beltway Circle Jerks that put on a summer long Debt Ceiling Soap Opera … the inept and incompetents whose public spectacle was cited by Standard & Poor’s as a reason for the downgrading of US debt?
Those opposed to “Let the People Vote” are either party operatives, entrenched interests or little minds that can’t think … or are afraid to think … for themselves.
»
- advertisements -
As we speak, we are, in reality, getting still less democracy- The super congress of 6 appears to now be the way the 1% will block our democratic process. The 1% have the super congress of 6(something new, like a shiny new car) muddling around until the 99%'s attention span is exceeded, and some new distraction is rammed down our throats by the MSM.
I get junked for this every time, but until there is understanding, the notion of "democracy" is going to be tossed about.
The US is not a democracy and never was. It is a Representative Republic. Your "voice" is funneled through those you elect (but for small-town affairs and referendums).
I wonder - really - how many of the OSW crowd either (1) voted for the shmucks perpetuating the Great Lie and now want them hanged or (2) didn't vote at all and now want their "voice" heard.
I'm still in the camp the US is FUBAR, but things don't get out of hand overnight. Usurpation uses as its primary means ambivalence and ignorance over coercion.
It is a Representative Republic.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
A representative republic? Oh, it is your yours.
US citizens and their cheap propaganda.
I am a People of the United States by birth. I am a citizen only by convenience. Do you know the difference between a People and a Citizen? You SHOULD. The 14th Amendment makes it abundantly clear what a 'citizen' is. Are you public property of the State or are you a sovereign?
The choice is yours. All it takes is to educate yourself. Your freedom is in YOUR hands and No others'.
... er ... as a newbie, you are kinda' compelled to answer the question: Who is this "We" that you are talking about?
- Ned
{and, here I'm going to throw a knuckle-ball at ya, get ready: What is "Our?" and what is the basis of the "99%"-->that is define the populations that you are painting with a broad brush.}
{{you do know what a paint brush is, don't you?}}
Democracy is tyrrany of the majority.it is anarchy and chaos. Only the majority has any rights and only the majority has any sovereignty.
The U.S. Is a REPUBLIC. Sovereignty is inherent the the PEOPLE- both individually and collectively. When a bill is passed in a Republic, IT IS ONLY A SUGGESTION. You still have your inalienable rights to ignore that bill.
in order to kill the beast, we must starve it, BY NOT PARTICIPATING IN IT.
Take your sovereignty back. It is the only solution. This solution DOES take work, however. You cannot be free if you are ignorant. Arm your self with the knowledge you need to defend your self against the Beast, for knowledge is power.
1215.Org
Anarchy means "no government." If there's no government then what is there to be democratic about?
Anarchy and choas are not the same thing. Anarchy and freedom are the same thing.
If you want to get technical, anarchy is the opposite of a monarchy. Anarchy is the absence of a king. The Republic that our Founding Fathers established and ordained made ALL OF US KINGS. It follows that the United States CANNOT, by definition, be an anarchy. For We the People are a nation of kings.
The word anarchy literally means "no ruler."
no ruler, from an- + archos ruler
Anarchy does not mean no government.
First Known Use: 1539
I don't love that site.
I appreciate your time and effort, but the strategy is deeply flawed. The lead line from the site: Our Mission: Through the courts, encouraging the Government to obey the law.
Guys, the government OWNS those courts. One does not make a mobster behave by asking his second-in-command to remind him of the rules.
Not exactly. The court is defined as the sovereign and the suit of the sovereign. If you can keep your rights in court, it is not that difficult. In a common law court, the judge does not hold any judgemental power.
Their courts, meaning courts of equity bound by statute, or penal bound by codes, are their courts. You will not find justice in those courts.
That site shows you how to convene YOUR court, as one of the people. To sue to make them prove that you are bound by their statutes.
It is difficult, but it is how it was set up. Many are looking at old law, how it was before we all became citizens under the 14th amendment. Eyes are opening, and the rules are still valid.
pods
pods, please don't think that I am trying to take shots at you. I'm not. I love the common law and would love to see the sovereignty of law restored. I just think the politicians, bureaucrats, et al, will use raw violence to stay in power, no matter what.
But I do wish you the best.
Oh no, not at all. And I absolutely agree that is a long road to freedom. Those in power will use all the power that they have to keep people down.
pods
Preach on brother...
There isn't a flaw in the type of system, it's what's evolved at the BEHEST of statists and bankers for 100 or so years.
Direct election of senators was one of the worst, THEY were supposed to represent the interests of their individual state, and until the 17th Amend, were appointed by them. The peoples branch was congress, allowing the people 2 of the 3 branches assured that corruption would find it's way in 10X faster, particularly if the populace was stupified with government schooling and cheap credit...
Statists have worked long and hard for this shit. Celente is a bright dude, but this load of crap out of him makes him look like a 3rd grader.
How the bloody hell did the statists get the 17th passed?
Easy, they just declare it passed, like the 16th.
http://www.thelawthatneverwas.com/seventeenth.aspx
pods
from link above.
""This [Federal Reserve Act] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Wilson} signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized....the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill." — Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr.
"From now on, depressions will be scientifically created." — Congressman Charles A. Lindbergh Sr.
"The financial system has been turned over to the Federal Reserve Board. That Board administers the finance system by authority of a purely profiteering group. The system is Private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money" — Charles A. Lindbergh Sr. "
Charles Augustus Lindbergh was a true statesman, as was Louis McFadden. Two adamant opponents of the central bank. What they said plays out every day.
Lindbergh even talked about both banking bills as being the same thing. Eustace Mullins Secrets of the Federal Reserve is a great read on this.
pods
http://maxkeiser.com/2011/10/10/police-know-the-federal-reserve-is-private/
Police Know The Federal Reserve is Private!
Posted on October 10, 2011 by maxkeiser
Great post JB. I love that site. Actually took a quote from it in my post.
When it sinks in what was set up in this land, it really is the most perfect system ever designed.
pods
Can anybody name a time when politicians weren't corrupt? Let's get rid of them and give anarchy a try for a while. It can't be much worse than what we currently have. I suspect most people would enjoy freedom and act in a pretty civilized manner, taking care of their own problems when they arise.
Read:
http://www.wix.com/andrewcostell3/simple-wealth-book
Of course it would work. But... it doesn't promise people something for nothing. That always freaks them out.
Nyet, on the other hand, there were periods when the polz "stayed bought."
- Ned
From the Mule's Mouth. The Dim Governor of North Carolina:
“I think we ought to suspend, perhaps, elections for Congress for two years and just tell them we won’t hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, to just let them help this country recover,” Perdue said at a rotary club event in Cary, North Carolina, according to the Raleigh News & Observer. “I really hope that someone can agree with me on that.”
In our own country study the State of New Hampshire, where town meetings in March set the town's budget which is voted on by line item veto. The budget cannot be exceeded without a special election (which costs a small fortune and it therefore to be avoided without extreme need). Money cannot by state law be shifted from one budget line to another, even if one department has a surplus and another a deficit. You'd be amazed how careful town officials can be when they know they cannot fudge the numbers. Meetings can last well into the night but the results are that property owners, who are the only taxpayers allowed to vote since they are the ones paying the town's taxes, get few if any surprises and a lot of efficiency for their tax dollar. One problem: you must be present at the meeting to vote. No proxy voting. Some votes are taken orally and some by ballot. It is the purest form of democracy I know of. Since the power is in the budget where the money is, the selectmen cannot get into a whole lot of trouble between meetings. That system could be amplified upon to fit our federal system. Imagine bills with no pork! Imagine no cost overruns. The crux of getting control of the federal government is for people to care enough to get involved. And if you don't pay taxes, you don't get a vote. PERIOD!
And if you don't pay taxes, you don't get a vote. PERIOD!
Just so. And all True Public Servants should be paid minimum wage, and no better benefits than the local burger flippers.
There's a libertarian ideal I would love to see George choke on.
Actually, the police and many other public service employees in NH are well paid. Most are covered by the NH Municipal Employees Union. The point here is not union busting or asking people to work for less than the private sector. It's just for the taxpayer - of which I assume (and we all know what you can do with that word) you are one - to know how deep the commitment is. Each year, when the towns get the increase in union raises or when the town votes an increase, they must by law put aside the amount of the persons' wages and benefits in the line item for payroll and benefits. That way, the town cannot over commit money that it does not have. Also, when the employee gets their annual contract renewal, they also get a breakdown of exactly what the townspeople have paid toward their salary and benefits. It can be sobering when you think that there is no way most private employers can match that total amount. Most town employees are very grateful for their jobs and the results show up in how they interact with the public. There are no Bell, California, surprises here. You can't hide anything. It is what it is. If the employee isn't happy with that arrangement, they can move elsewhere but few do. There is pride in doing the town's work.
Translated into the King's English: The Dims are about to get a royal ass whopping, so George, ever the hypocrite, thinks it's time to suspend all elections.
Put politicians in office like you do with jury duty, make it an appointment lottery.
Two years then back home to live with your neighbors.
1. You will be a legal voting citizen and you may actually live in the district/state you represent.
2. Much less chance of you being an egomaniac/megalomaniac (Joe Biden, Arlen Specter, Barney Frank, Orrin Hatch, etc.)
3. Goldman Sachs or GE or General Dynamics will not be chomping at the bit to pay you to be a "consultant".
4. If you waste money and screw up your community won't be too happy with you and it will be hard to hide in a limousine or gated community or small island.
largest city in the world is lost now. it must be evacuated immediately ......
http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/10/breaking-news-tokyo-on-the-edge/?utm_...
33 million japanese must move...........where?
I wonder how long it will continue to be 33 million.
http://enenews.com/simply-put-it%E2%80%99s-over-tokyo-on-the-edge-show-host-astonished-by-latest-strontium-90-findings-video
http://enenews.com/update-strontium-90-195-bqkg-yokohama-30-km-south-tokyo
http://enenews.com/japan-times-unusually-high-amount-fallout-okutama-tokyo-300000-bqm-1-usvhr-home-worlds-largest-drinking-water-reservoir-kind-built-supply-tokyo
http://enenews.com/tepco-uses-radioactive-water-from-reactors-no-5-and-6-to-spray-throughout-fukushima-plant-over-100-tons-a-day-tanks-close-to-overflowing
http://enenews.com/tokyo-govt-finds-5-times-higher-cesium-levels-japan-govt-50000-bqm-city-center-photos
A) this is off-topic...can't you wait another day or two 'til George talks about Fuku again? :-) and B) bull-fucking-shit.
Do you really think Tokyo is going to be a ghost-town? What fantasyland do you live in?
He's submitting a piece of new business on which all the direct democrats may vote. If a majority of people wish to discuss Fukushima then you'll discuss it and like it.
Look to Switzerland
The only politicians needed there are the LOCAL POLITICIANS , who have to face their electorate every day on the street and take direct responsibility for their actions .
This direct accountability serves as an efficient restraint on human natures more dark sides ...
See my post above.
The state does have an interesting way of populating its military ranks ;-)
The physical manifistation of the activation of the physical instrumentalities of the second ammendment. They are fully trained to ignore all voice and paper.
Forget about politicians. The root cause of all our sufferings is the Infinite Growth monetary orthodox, which is today's form of perpetual motion machines. Until it gets smashed, nothing can be changed.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6224/6232273548_b55d819865_b.jpg
George, you are on a roll! The coon is liking it.
http://www.livestream.com/globalrevolution/
Direct democracy is at best inefficient. What you really want is to end corruption.
All you need to amend this line:
"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."
Just add corporation, or institution next to King, Prince and Foreign State. It's hardly a reinterpretation, because its purpose is clear.
Pass an ammendment to make formal, official and fundamental what is already correctly identified in fundamental law... that all "organizations" (government, corporations, etc) are "fictitious entities", meaning "they do not exist" and therefore can have NO legal status or recognition.
DOA. It's great idea with no way to be implemented without resorting to the pointy end of a pitchfork. Also expect the Presidential election process to be changed to resemble American Idol... singing and dancing you know... it's what WE THE PEOPLE would want after all. Oh yes... and the USA would likely become a Fundamentalist Christian Theocracy... one nation under one God as it were...
Besides... 'Direct Democracy' is not only Anti-Semitic but it's also Anti-American. Clarence Thomas and the Supremes would stand for none of it.
This article is music to my ears. As far as I can see direct democracy is the only way to deal with the fact that when the few rule the many, the few are vulnerable to bribery and threat. Any other fix we do now to stop the evil will eventually be undone after people forget if we do not add the check and balance of direct democracy to our constitution.
What if we all asserted self ownership and supported others in their efforts to do the same?
Then the guy who bought all the F-18's from the defunct government you abandoned would show up in your town and demand that you hand everything over. And then guy with the left over nukes would blow that guy up, take his stuff, and come back and get whatever you hid from the first guy. Then some other guy with more nukes and an army of people that he feeds would go to war with the other guy, ad nauseum. That's what has played out through history since human beings formed groups. That's why in the entire world the system you propose does not exist. You're never going to do away with those who would be king, so you develop a system that keeps those guys in check as much as possible.
So you admit that government creates the weapons that are the biggest threat to mankind. That's a good start. You forget that those weapons are already arrayed against innocent people in other countries and in the Unites States itself. It is the leader of the US government that claims the right to use aerial bombardment to assassinate anyone, anywhere and who asserts the right to use nuclear weapons to force other nations to conform with US hegemony.