Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Representative Republic’

MOST IMPORTANT ARTICLE WRITTEN IN 2016: When America Becomes South Africa


waving flagBy Ilana Mercer September 28, 2016

‘If African-Americans didn’t get out and vote for Hillary Clinton, they would be dissing him and his legacy.’ So warned President Barack Obama, in a speech at the Black Caucus Foundation in Washington DC, on September 17.

The woman whose election promises portend a war on whites, Walmart and the wealthy has nothing to fear. Obama’s political cant notwithstanding, there isn’t much of a chance blacks will side overwhelmingly with Hillary’s rival.

Like never before, the 2016 election has been characterized by “a muscular mobilization of a race-based community, coercive control of territory and appeals by powerful charismatic leaders.”

What do I mean by “coercive control of territory”? Consider what would transpire if Donald Trump were to campaign “big-league” in Birmingham (Alabama), Charlotte (North Carolina), or South Los Angeles. Riots would erupt. (Incidentally, the thing where private property is invaded and looted is not called a protest.)

As sure as night follows day, the American democracy is destined to resemble that of South Africa, where a ruling majority party is permanently entrenched, and where voting is characterized by what has become Barack Obama’s signature tactic, a “muscular mobilization of the race-based community.”obama- Marxist tyrant

The last, twice-repeated reference is out of Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-illegalalienvoters-300x300Apartheid South-Africa.” In 2011, the book used the tragic example of post-apartheid South Africa to forewarn Americans of the effects of a shift in their country’s founding political dispensation, a shift being achieved stateside through immigration central-planning.

America’s political class has been tinkering with the country’s historical demographic composition for decades. The consequence of the mass importation of poor, Third World immigrants is that America, like South Africa, is headed to dominant-party status, in which a permanent majority intractably hostile to the minority consolidates power, and in which voting along racial lines is the rule.

It used to be that the Democratic Party was this nascent majority’s political organ, offering a platform of preferential policies for a voting bloc whose “interests are viewed through the prism of racial affiliations.” Obama’s Dreams from America are for a countrytryanny in which the historic majority is destined to become a marginalized minority, consigned to the status of spectator in the political bleachers. Ditto Clinton’s dreams. But, as election year 2016 has shown, the Republican Party is vying for a similar mantle.

That South Africa is riven by race is indisputable. Each election is “a racial census as far as whites and blacks are concerned.” In the much-ballyhooed, historic election of 1994, “only two to three percent of whites voted for historically black parties and perhaps five percent of blacks voted for historically white parties. The ANC relied for ninety-four percent of its vote on black support. The historically white parties had been barred from campaigning in the black townships.” Yet elections since 1994 have had the blessing of every liberal alive, and that includes many of the world’s self-styled conservatives. All about the vote

“The rule of the people, demos, and the people’s ethnicity, ethnos” invariably clash, argued Michael Mann, “one of the leading historical sociologists of our time.” In “The Dark Side of Democracy: Explaining Ethnic Cleansing” (2004), Mann contends that in the earlier, more formative stages of their development, democracies are prone to carrying out murderous ethnic cleansing, which in extreme forms can become genocidal.rep-rep

“The growth of popular sovereignty, the institutionalization of universal citizenship, [and] the creation of mass society” have often seen “ethnic groups laying claim to the same territory resort to the use of force, and, when frustrated, to murderous ethnic cleansing and even genocide.” Examples of this phenomenon in modernity: the ethnic expulsions and massacres in the democratized former Yugoslavia and Rwanda during the 1990s, the genocide of the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire under the Young Turks (particularly in 1915-1916), and the mechanized mass murder of the Jews in Nazi Germany. While the infant South-African democracy fits snugly within his thesis, democracy devotees [the writer is not one] have accused Mann of twisting like a Cirque du Soleil contortionist to stretch the definition of democracy in making his case.burke

Where Mann is at pains to prove the murderous nature of young democracies, the arguments against democracy for South Africa, which have been propounded by Duke University scholar Donald L. Horowitz, have considerable force. Finely attuned to “important currents in South African thought,” Horowitz offered up an excruciatingly detailed analysis of South Africa’s constitutional options.

In “A Democratic South Africa?: Constitutional Engineering in a Divided Society” (1991), Horowitz concluded that democracy is, in general, unusual in Africa, and, in particular, rare in ethnically and racially divided societies, where majorities and minorities are rigidly predetermined.engineering2

Prone to seeing faces in the clouds, the new South Africa’s Anglo-American cheerleaders were impervious to such sobering pronouncements. It remained for students of democracy such as Horowitz to hope only that “the probability will … recede that one person, one vote, one value, and one state will degenerate into only one legal party and one last election.”

quote-the-one-pervading-evil-of-democracy-is-the-tyranny-of-the-majority-or-rather-of-that-lord-acton-0-15-01“Elections to be meaningful presuppose a certain level of political organization. … The primary problem is … the creation of a legitimate public order. Authority has to exist before it can be limited, and it is authority that is in scarce supply in the modernizing countries,” warned Samuel Huntington in “Political Order In Changing Societies.” Little did Huntington consider that, with enough tinkering by its ruling elites; a modern and mighty country like the U.S. could devolve into an atavistic and dangerous place.

Not nearly as hopeful as Horowitz was that “noted student of nationalism” Elie Kedourie. “If majority and minority are perpetual, then government ceases to have a mediatory or remedial function, and becomes an instrument of perpetual oppression of the minority by the majority,” concluded Kedourie. It was after a visit to South Africa that he wrote the following, in the November 1987 issue of the South Africa International:

The worst effects of the tyranny of the majority are seen when parliamentary government on the unalloyed Westminster model is introduced into countries divided by religion or language or race. Such for example was the case of Iraq … where an extremely heterogeneous society came to be endowed with constitutions which made no provision for diversity, and where the result was tyranny of one groups over the other groups in the society.

A prerequisite for a classical liberal democracy is that majority and minority status be interchangeable and fluid in politics; that a ruling majority party be as likely to become a minority party as the obverse. By contrast, in South Africa, the majority and the minorities are politically permanent, not temporary.

America’s Founding Fathers had attempted to forestall raw democracy by devising a republic. Every democratic theorist worth his salt—Robert Dahl and Elaine Spitz come to mind—has urged that the raw, ripe rule of the mob and its dominant, anointed party be severely curtailed under certain circumstances fast approaching in the United States of America. These are “whenever people of different languages, races, religions, or national origins, with no firm habits of political co-operation and mutual trust, are to unite in a single polity.”

In other words, multicultural America.Truth The New Hate Speech We have been torn apart Freedom is never free

Adapted from “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons For America From Post-Apartheid South-Africa (2011). When tolerance becomes a one way street

ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Ilana Mercer

Ilana MercerILANA MERCER is the author of “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June, 2016), and “Into The Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa” (2011). She has been writing an acclaimed, weekly, paleolibertarian column—begun in Canada—since 1999. Follow her on Twitter and on Facebook. Subscribe to ilana’s new YouTube channel.

>>>>>>>THE MOST IMPORTANT REPORT YOU WILL READ TODAY<<<<<<<


This is the Latest Dirty Liberal Plan to Go Around the Constitution

Constitution-Shredded
In 2000, George W. Bush won the election to the office of the presidency fair and square and completely in-line with the Constitution. Although he lost the popular vote by 0.5%, he won the electoral college votes by a margin of 271 to 266. Contrary to what many people believe, the election of the president and vice-president are both determined by votes from the electoral college. Still sulking from that loss, and perhaps looking for a back-up plan to their voter fraud methods, progressive left Democrats are ramping up their efforts to implement a new plan. They want to circumvent the Constitution by ditching the electoral college. Their movement is called the National Popular Vote. (PLEASE GO TO THIS LINK AND READ THAT REPORT)

Tyranney Alert

The attempt to ditch the Constitution, for what essentially amounts to mob rule, began long before the 2000 election. In 2006, Phyllis Schlafly wrote an article for the Eagle Forum on The Subversive Plan to Ditch the Constitution(PLEASE GO TO THIS LINK AND READ THAT REPORT)

A plot is afoot to change our constitutional form of government by ditching the Electoral College. John Anderson, Birch Bayh and John Buchanan, three losers who were defeated in the 1980 Reagan landslide, are scheming to change our Constitution without complying with the amendment process.

Our Constitution requires that a president be elected by a majority of votes in the Electoral College, with each state’s vote weighted based on its population. But some who took an oath to defend our Constitution are plotting to undermine its essential structure by a compact among as few as eleven of the most populous states.

She continued by explaining the negative impact such a change would have on the vote of every day Americans.

The elimination of the Electoral College would overnight make irrelevant the votes of Americans in about 25 states because candidates would zero in on piling up votes in large-population states. Big-city machines would take over, and candidates from California or New York would enjoy a built-in advantage.

The Electoral College provides an essential safeguard against the democratic factionalism decried by James Madison in Federalist 10. The Electoral College ensures that no single faction or issue can elect a president because he must win many diverse states to be elected.

The NPV slogan “Every Vote Equal” is stunningly dishonest because the NPV proposal is based on legalizing vote-stealing and on changing the rules of presidential elections by a compact of as few as eleven states instead of the 38 states needed to amend the Constitution. NPV should be repudiated before it goes any further.

Not surprisingly, the states that have quietly worked to implement a plan to eliminate electoral college votes are all blue states.

The latest to join in on this ‘National Popular Vote compact’  is New York. According to silive.com, the Empire State is joining with California, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, New jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington in an agreement to award their electoral votes based upon the winner of the national popular vote. With New York’s votes in the mix, the far-left progressive plan to go around the Constitution has 165 of the 270 votes needed to pull off such a devious scheme. The ramifications for such a change are huge.

According to FOX News digital politics editor Chris Stirewalt this plan is one that will impact rural America and ‘subvert the will of the Constitution and the founders.” 

“This is disempowering to rural America and empowering to urban America,” he said, explaining that it amounts to a “hack” of the Constitution by people who don’t believe in the Electoral College.

Since there is not enough support in Congress to change the Constitution and officially end the Electoral College, this plan would allow popular vote advocates to work around it.

Stirewalt pointed out that this plan is part of a larger trend on the part of “frustrated” liberals who haven’t been able to bring about the changes they want.

“They are simply taking them. They are simply doing it and if people dissent and if people complain and if the stodgy, old Constitution gets in the way, if the fussy old Whigs in the Electoral College complain about it, too bad. Because they’re gonna hack the code and they’re gonna find a way to get what they want,” he said.

Remember the doozy of a lie that Obama told last week when he claimed ‘the Constitution is still intact.’ With Barack Obama as president and the left so power hungry that they will demonize every day Americans and subvert the system of government set up by our Founders, the Constitution is not intact; it is under attack. The left has long worked pervert the history of America to make people believe that the United States was set up as a democracy. It was not. As Stirewalt said, “the United States is not a democracy. This is a [Representative] Republic.”

There is a difference.

SERIOUS TYRANNY ALERT!!!!!!! PLEASE PAY CAREFUL ATTENTION!!!!!!!


My Own Two Cents

Everyone needs to remember that our Founders gave us a “Representative Republic”, NOT a “Democracy”. You need to research and have a clear understanding of the difference.

The reason our Founders gave us the “Electoral College”, was to eliminate what the Leftist want to establish. The Electoral College is there to ensure that the bigger States in the Union cannot conspire to elect every President. It gives EQUAL say to the smaller States in the election process.

What you are about to read is an attempt of the EXTREME Left to do away with the original purpose of the Electoral College and replace it with simple majority elections, the exact thing the Founders wanted to guard against.

WE MUST STOP THIS. WE CANNOT LET THIS STAND. Please fight with me to eradicate this from our country.

Jerry Broussard

Three Star Line

http://www.newsmax.com/Morris/morris-democrats-electoral-college/2014/04/15/id/565661/

Democrats Conspiring to Rig Electoral College, Law Passed in 9 States So Far

Tuesday, 15 Apr 2014 09:26 AM

By Dick Morris

Tyranney Alert

A plan, now stealthily making its way through state legislatures with astonishing speed, would junk the Electoral College and award the presidency to the winner of the popular vote.

The plan involves an Interstate Compact where states would commit to select electors pledged to vote for the national popular vote winner regardless of how their own state voted. When enough states pass this law — sufficient to cast the Electoral College’s majority 270 votes —  it will take effect.

The Electoral College will become a vestigial anachronism.

So far, nine states and the District of Columbia — casting 136 electoral votes — have joined moving half way to the 270 needed to put the compact into effect. The ratifying states are: Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, Hawaii, Washington, Massachusetts, DC, Vermont, California, and Rhode Island.

Both houses in New York have passed it and its on Governor Cuomo’s desk.

And, it has already passed one house in: Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Oregon. These states, plus New York represent 107 votes. Combined with the others they are up to 242 votes . They need 270.

Who is pushing this?

All of those ratifying voted for Obama as did eight of the 10 one-house states.

Tyranney Alert

The Movement is funded, in part, by the Center for Voting and Democracy, a George Soros-funded election group. (Is that enough reason for you to help stop this?)

 Essentially, it is an end run around the regular constitutional amending process. Rather than get a two-thirds majority of each house of Congress and three-quarters of the states, this proposal would take effect when a simple majority approve it.

 Why are Democrats pushing this plan?

Tyranney Alert
Democrats usually see a smaller percentage of their people go to the polls than Republicans do.

Under the electoral vote system, they figure why beat the drums to get a high turnout in New York City when the state will go Democrat anyway? But, if its the popular vote that matters, the big city machines can do their thing — with devastating impact.

And think of the chances for voter fraud! Right now, the biggest cities, the ones most firmly in Democratic control (e.g. Washington DC, New York, Detroit, Chicago, San Francisco, etc.) are all solidly in blue states. Not only does this make it unnecessary to maximize turnouts there, but it also makes it unnecessary to promote double voting, fraudulent voting, and all the other tricks of the trade at which Democrats excel.

But if the popular vote determines who will be the next president, we can bet that the machines will be out in force lining up voters, real and phony, to pad their statistics.

Some Republicans, particularly in non-swing states, are inclined to back the proposal simply so that they get their fair share of attention. They are tired of delegating to Ohio, Florida, Nevada, Virginia, et al the power to choose the president. And they can’t remember when a candidate for that office last favored their state with his presence.

But don’t let our “Attention Deficit Disorder” lead us to give away the store. The popular vote is what the Democrats do best. Fighting them on it is, in Winston Churchill’s words, “like going into the water to fight the shark.”

Republicans need to kill this proposal and they better get busy doing it. Some small states are backing it because they are tired of all the attention being focused on swing states. But Republicans must stand firm and not yield to the temptation to back it.

How can we stop the Democrats from ravaging our political system? The key battles are coming up in Arkansas and North Carolina. In both states, one house has passed the Compact. We need to stand firm in these two red states and block the Compact from taking effect. Republicans in Minnesota and Wisconsin, both blue states, need to stop ratification in their states.

And, Republicans should focus on stopping the second house from ratification in those states where only one house has acted.

 Our democracy depends on it.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Morris/morris-democrats-electoral-college/2014/04/15/id/565661#ixzz2yzybSQKa
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: