There was once a point in this country's history where the leaders represented their constituents, this is true with the exception of a few times when leaders felt that morals should prevail over constituent votes. The example of this exception is Daniel Webster who voted to end slavery even though his constituents disagreed. His decision was based not on political gain or bullying for a party, but because he acted to end something that he knew was wrong. Daniel Webster gave up a strong shot at the presidency to make that decision.
Today, however, politicians vote through bills that their constituents are against, not because of some great moral belief, but because they want to make their mark in the world. The vast majority of Americans belief that extending the Bush Tax Cuts is a good thing, and that Obama Care is wrong, yet the political powers in play routinely vote against their constituents' beliefs. The only conclusion is that they believe that they are better suited to make decisions regarding the direction of this country than their constituents. Make no mistake, that mindset alone changes our congress from leaders by the people, of the people and from the people to a ruling class.
The moment the ruling class starts to believe that their education, life experience, wealth, family ties etc. makes them able to make decisions with impunity regardless of what the american public believes or wants we live in an Oligarchy. Don't agree? Then why is it that in the information age when someone could run for office with little to no money using youtube, facebook and other networking sites the majority of congressmen are worth more than $1 Million? Why is it when they pass laws like healthcare reform and social security, they don't hold themselves to the same rules they expect average Americans to hold to? Why is it that when a congressman commits tax fraud there's actual argument on whether or not to hold him accountable?
Still think you're not being ruled?
No comments:
Post a Comment