Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 36 Share on Twitter 1 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H2'ed 2/24/14

A Revolution: Part I The End Goals, Why and How.

By       (Page 1 of 1 pages)   13 comments, In Series: A Revolution
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Pal Palsimon
Become a Fan
  (14 fans)
A Revolution:  Part I The End Goals, Why and How.

(Image by nsahusse)   Details   DMCA

The major revolutionary changes I would like to see are three-fold:
1.) Total revolutionary change of our government, to be run by an "equality party", a government that is not influenced by capitalism, socialism or communism, but governs for the benefit of the country as a whole, rather than on behalf of some at the expense of others, and 
2.) A government under which there is a new system of Economic distribution that does not depend upon capitalism but is what I would call a true equal opportunity system.
3.)  A combined system that leaves the running of government to the experts and the running of the economy to workers.
How we get there? These goals will not be reached overnight.  The path is not simple. It is long and arduous. But good goals are always like that. They take hard work, dedication, perseverance.  And, in the long run, our goals might have to be modified to gain consensus.
The path to these goals, as I see it requires:
a.) that we give as much support as we can to third party candidates who share our ideas at the state legislative level, as well as to our local officials who would give those state representatives inspiration and political support. 
b.) Concurrently we must advocate for an Article V. Constitutional Convention supported by, hopefully, those parties we have supported at the State level and 
c.)  participate actively to assure any such convention will be dominated by delegates  who share our ideas and goals, and people seeking real change;  
d.) become active in promoting a Constitutional Convention that will result in adequate  re-write of our constitution to promote a new form of government that will be run by an equalityParty, or at least something akin to an equality party, and which cannot be captured by capitalism, socialism or communism.(More on that subject in another article.) 
e.) Finally, another long process, bring about means by which our economy begins on a path to domination by worker-owned businesses. (Also subject to another article.)
The first tasks on the path to these goals is to obtain equal voting opportunity, here's why:
According to Nader/Gonzales Six global corporations control more than half of all mass media in our country: newspapers, magazines, books, radio and television. Our democracy is being swamped by the confluence of money, politics and concentrated media. Their conclusion, in part,  ..... "Without a reconstruction of our democracy ambitious program of political and economic change will succeed. Nor can worries about poverty, discrimination, joblessness, the troubled conditions of education, environment, street and suite crime, budget deficits, costly and inadequate health care, and energy boondoggles be addressed in a constructive and enduring way. .............So it is time for a civic rebellion, Jefferson style."

Public Citizen gives us a link, where we find the article Citizens United is Just the Tip of the Iceberg by Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap  who  Serves on the Executive Committee Move to Amend. She is Field Organizing Coordinator for the campaign.  She says here "At the crux of the [electoral] crisis are two core legal doctrines. One is "corporate personhood," a court-created precedent that illegitimately gives corporations rights that were intended for human beings. The other is "money equals free speech.An amendment to the US Constitution is the only lasting solution to this problem. The only amendment worth fighting for MUST address both doctrines. As a quick refresher, here is are some examples of  why we must abolish ALL corporate constitutional rights:" Her conclusion is that a LASTING (emphasis mine)  amendment to the Constitution is imperative and that "the Move To Amend coalition suggests that we should not limit our vision and actions."

From all that I have read, these actions by Move to Amend may include the efforts which co-exist beside, and is a friend of, Public Citizen and Wolf-PAC and other such rebellious organizations including those actions calling for an Article V, Constitutional Convention. Certainly  there would be many enemies of an Article V Constitutional Convention because many politicians and regular citizens presently have a big stake in our system as it exists today, and these people are afraid such a Convention could lead to the loss of some of the benefits they now have. Many do not realize they, too, will slowly lose whatever they have left unless we get major changes.

It will take a lot of unselfish people to be willing to potentially sacrifice what they have for the benefit of our country. Thom Hartmann who also provides a link to Move to Amend in his transcript of his show, has talked extensively about the sacrifices made by the Founders of our Constitution. In summary he ends by saying they were unselfish for the most part, risking it all for the benefit of the nation, and that we need more people like that today. He states also that  

"These were people who didn't send others' kids off to war but fought it themselves - these were people who didn't give kickbacks to the bankers and robber barons but fought to restrain the power of banksters and business - these were people who didn't get richer and richer the longer they stayed in office but who usually retired from public office broke.

"These were people who risked it all - and in some cases - gave it all up - for the best interests of this nation.

"We need that same mentality from our lawmakers today.

To put our government back into the hands of the people, go to Move to Amend dot org\. That's The Big Picture."

My position is that the path to "lasting amendment to the Constitution" is by an Article V Constitutional Convention, and I am supporting that effort with Wolf-PAC. Some  people have argued with me that neither Thom Hartmann nor Move to Amend have endorsed an Article V Constitutional Amendment, yet it appears they are certainly prepared to consider it based on all they have written.  What you want and/or how you get it are always debatable. But the best pros and cons about the value of an Article V Constitutional Convention, which I, myself, advocate,  come from experts on Constitutional Law to be discussed in a later article.

Getting support in an environment of opposition brings these kinds of responses: Lazy people will ask  why we can't get a handle on the election campaign problems some "easy way."  It is ludicrous to think major problems and corruption or diseases can be easily cured. Look what we went through to get a handle on mafia, drug lords, HIV, Cancer - and still not completely solved.  People who are too busy to vote or participate in campaigns and figure they are doing all right as things are and don't have time to worry about these problems. Self-deceptive people say the problem is getting people to vote, and complain that only about sixty percent (60%) of eligible voters bother to vote and the rest of citizens are too lazy or ignorant to understand the importance of the vote.  They believe if everyone voted, we could solve the problem of our electoral inequality and get our issues addressed by the present government. These people ignore the fact that even if 100% of the voters voted, we cannot defeat the powerful SUPER PACS on issues they feel are important to them, even tho detrimental to the rest of us.
Why is that? Because the electoral system is broken. Broke, broke, broken. The system is corrupt, not by all individuals involved in it, but by the way the deck has long been stacked, and made worse by Citizens United.  We are referred in a posting on "TED" April 8, 2013 that a revered professor of Constitutional Law, Lawrence Lessig,  gives us an idea of what we are up against:  ..." how .000042% of the American population, or 132 Americans, provided 60% of the SuperPAC money raised in the 2012 election. These people essentially have the money to ensure who is going to make it out of the primary process, and hence win that golden opportunity to run in a general election. And these 132 individuals do not represent a demographic sampling of all Americans, they share at least one thing in common--extreme wealth. But it gets more interesting from here, I won't spoil it--watch the talk below."
Some argue that only "extremists" would be proponents of a Constitutional Convention. Yes. True. There are many of them too, and I am one. They don't want change and they fear a re-write of the entire Constitution. This gives us a people well divided on our goal.  But it is also debatable whether a Constitutional Convention would necessarily result in the total re-write, which I now advocate and just might not get.  Until  more recently I have not personally recommended that we MUST necessarily "throw out the baby with the bath water" and totally re-write the Constitution. "  I believe in using the tools we have available, and I know that  Article V Convention was meant to be used whenever we had a Congress that adamantly would not propose Amendments we need.  Opponents call for patience and the use of our old, worn out tools (the vote, petitions, etc.) to convince Congress to do the "will of the people." But the patience of many of us extremists has been worn out.
True, egalitarians often - though they too have many intellectual arguments for their positions -  must base their reasoning on the "I have a dream" model, rather than pure intellectualism. I do not deny it.  And from that point of view, anyone would agree that having a Constitutional Convention might be dangerous.  But many advocates of a Constitutional Convention are calling for very narrow changes, not for a whole re-write..(This is another area of great debate on how the Convention will be conducted. )
End Part I.  Next Part coming soon, arguments and details will be considered.
Interesting 4   Must Read 3   Well Said 2  
Rate It | View Ratings

Pal Palsimon Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Palsimon, formally educated in journalism & law, is an independent progressive activist & writer, focusing on guarding integrity of media & government. (.)

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Follow Me on Twitter     Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Champion Mortgage and Bank of America Foreclose Reverse Mortgages

How to Solve Racism

Summary of Adam Curtis Part 1 The Power of Nightmares

Constitutional Change (Political vs Economic Democracy)

Realistic Compromise Gun Legislation

A Revolution: Part III The Devil in Details.

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend