Democracy or Republic
Debating the master instead of master baiting
In a Democracy agreement by the majority as; to what is acceptable behavior is, not always right. The majority can be wrong that's why we believe in a Republican form of government and should not be confused with the Republican party
A Republic is where a minority in the form of jurors who are selected from a randomly selected crosssection of individuals of our peers in a jury trial are the arbitors of wheather the law is to be upheld in a particular instance. Not all infractions of the law are thought by everyone to be breaking the law generally speaking.
A jury has the right to uphold or deny the prosecution's view on wheather a defendant is found guilty of breaking of the law Just as a judge.jurors can even judge the law as well as the defendent.Jurors can decide wheather the law is fair and reasonable despite what the court Judge says to the jurors in court.at the end of the trial.You know; where the judge tells the jury they have to judge the defendant based on the law;that they cannot deviate from the what the law says.This is an attempt by the judge to get the jurors to accept the law as it stands and not judge the law as which they have the right to do!
The next time you go to a courtroom take a good look at the flag in the courtroom as well as all the other rooms in the building.That gold fringe at the bottom of the flad is an indication of what form of lawful juristriction you are under;just like when you go on a cruise ship;or any other ship.It's Maritime,Merchant law,law of the sea or even navel military law.Under this law ,if you happen to be on a ship at sea ,wheather civil or merchant or military,you are required to adhere to the laws of that countries laws and authorities under that flag.
In a perfect Democracy where all the people are in perfect agreement as to what behavior was acceptable.any law they passed would probably be considered moot and there would be no need for the law A pure Democracy can only work if all the participants are of the same mind.Which seldom if ever happens.
A Democracy is sometimes called mob rule(simple majority) and If the mob can't agree,you have anarchy.In a Democracy as we know there are usually two groups with different opinions on any topic. A simple majority is all that is needed in a democracy.If there are three points of view then the one with the most votes gets to be the prevailing view,even if it is not the majority view .In the unitedstates; in most congressional votes on legistalation requires a two thirds majority for passage.So we don't have a pure Democracy in our government despite what you here politicians declaring in their speeches.,that doesn't mean that it is right.That's why it's better to have a system where at least two thirds of the congressmen have to agree for legislation to be passed.Then there is the three quarter rule when three quarters would have to agree on any changes in any contitutional law
That's one reason we live under a Republican form of government Under a Republican form of government the law is not static but dynamic changing with the changing views of the public in general through trial and error by jury,or Grand jury
we are not perfect.So,until we can truly agree on everything a Republican or representitive form of government is always better than a Democracy in every way.Notice I didn't say the Republican party or Democratic party.Names can be superficial.It's the true meaning behind it that really matters.
A Democratic (Republic) which is what we seem to have is a mixed government and not what our founding fathers had in mind when they started their "State" of the Union We have a Democracy when it comes to the public voting for candidates,which means if you have third party cadidates ,or more than that,the vote total you will need is diminished.meaning you don't need a full majority of the voters to win .Just the highest number.For examplelets say the total number of voters is a hundred and there are three cadidates.one gets 33 votes,the second one gets 33 votes and the third gets 34 votes.It's obvious that the third cadidate won by a simple majority of the total votes cast He won by one vote even though a majority 66 percent of the people didn't vote for him.That is why one or both main parties usually intentially and I might say illegally try to keep third party cadidates out of the political picture by deniying them access to the public whenever and wherever possible.
Originally ,the federal income tax and social security tax only applied to federal employees,since working for the federal government was considered a privilage and privilages could be taxed under federal law .That's why they call it internal revenue,because it was a tax on employees who worked for the federal government.Does everyone work for the federal government? It appears so ! But appearances can be decieving as we all know too well as It's not impossible for the people to be fooled
."The district of Columbia".Which is not a "State" within The unitedstates was created by the states to be a kind of employee of the states to facillitate commerce between the unitedstates of the union and between the states of the union and other states or countries around the world.So ;the idea that the Federal government can control something other than commerce between the states of the union and between the states of the union and other countries is bogus------.(Mandating a law that has nothing to do with interstate commerce)Such as Local schools,or abortion if, done in the state of the mother's birth,(although I personally disagree with abortion I present it here as a demonstration of how the federal government is overstepping it's bounds)..
The fact that so many corporations and companies do business across state lines is, the only reason the federal government has juristiction over those corporations or company dealings.I think that's why we think the federal government has juristriction,in every case.Because we give it to them by our actions and statements by declaring that we are citizens of Quote "THE UNITEDSTATES " by using the zipcodes which are considered under federal juristiction.Voluntarily getting a social security card as a requirement of employment and paying federal income taxes as well.
The supreme court ruled that the income tax on the average american was unconstitutional two years after it appeared the income tax law had been ratified by 2/3's of the states ,although their seems to have been some con-traversy as to the validity of the income tax being valid the law was published in the national register and was declared law by some congressmen by virtue of that fact it was published in the national register.The congress passed a law saying that any law that was published in the national register was law even if there was some question as to it being legally ratified by a two thirds majority of the states. Give me a break! Sounds like some mischef going on to me.In any case the case went to the supreme court two years later.The court decided that the income tax on the nations states was unconstitutional.It's beyond me as to why the same supreme court never had a case where the laws published in the national register,that may have been published,under dubious circumstances ,has never been brought up by congress then or now. Then I should be surprised since they are the ones who passed that law in the first place.
Today we have a whole slew of federally mandated laws that the local or state governments are now being made dependent on the federal government for funding for although that funding comes from the states as a whole.rather than any single state.
Hitler once made the statement to the affect that-----paraphasing here --" It is to our great advantage that the people do not think believing everything we say is true."The bigger the lie the more believable it is to the general public.They cannot believe that someone they trust can do such things.The same can be said of the average mother or father about their children.It happens though. Could that be cognitive dissonance.Where what we hear from our leaders and on the news is always taken to be the truth. A kind of mass hypnosis.
All together now can you say,Hiel Hitler ! Remember Germany was a democratic state or country even though they had the NAZI party in power when hitler was in charge.
A president is not a dictator unless marshall law is declared,and even then only for six months time under our federal law at which time congress can decide what to be done.