Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Great Experiments

The first great experiment was whether or not political power could be turned over to one in four male Colonists. The result was that yes, the power could be turned over to this group. With the qualification that, in the absence of controls, their better angels would slowly expand voting rights to non-stakeholders.

The second great experiment was whether or not political power could be granted to women. The result was no, it could not, as evidenced by the emergence of the New Deal shortly after female empowerment. This legislation sealed the fate of our democracy, ensuring its eventual bankruptcy. Females, by nature, seek security and are eager to nurture, traits incompatible with the discipline necessary to exercise responsible political power.

The third great experiment was whether or not political power could be granted in a blanket form to historically-underachieving demographic groups. The relative performance of the States can be compared to determine the outcome of this experiment. The shaded states (above) have the deficits. It can be seen that states with high percentages of these demographic groups bankrupt themselves and become corrupt autocracies quicker than states without high percentages of these demographic groups. See the City of Chicago.

Leading us to the question of what should be done if the government fails and the military has to step in. And to the even more elegant answer, which is to re-adopt the Constitution and Bill of Rights as they were originally adopted in 1789, limiting voting rights to property-holding men. This can be done regardless of race, setting a minimum domestic real estate equity requirement, perhaps $10,000. Amendments following the 10th can be repealed, and be re-established with the benefit of hindsight.

This system, like life itself, if unfair. But it is also the most humane and fair of a whole bunch of potential scenarios. Mankind has a very checkered track record.

1 comment:

George said...

That "RE-SET" plan sounds sort of like the Constitution Party's, which also carries no water for any amendments after #10. The Constitutionalists want a stronger role for the Christian religion than the Founders had, though, encoding Right to Life, etc.

I've always thought that a "RE-SET" would go back that far, but I would go farther, and require a freehold, that is, property held outright. If you have a minor equity position in your property, what's to prevent the major position, your mortgage holder, from trying to dictate to you how you vote, either via demand or bribery?

I would add also to the voter list anyone who had fought for the nation in war (Yes, I've seen "Starship Troopers"), merely because if a man or woman is willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for his/her nation, he/she is deserving enough to have a voice in the direction of the nation.