Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

[emilynghiem]

Letting them have their own systems is completely unrealistic unless we want to break the country into Apartheid zones.

DISAGREE boedicca

1. we already have people organized locally by SOVEREIGN STATES.
there is nothing wrong with districts working to become self-governing, self-sustaining and viable economically
where they can incorporate as their own towns or even campus communities under an LLC or land trust
similar to Native American settlements.

Anyone can form their own LLC and set up a cooperative for farmers, health care, school campus, or medical center.

Look at military bases, look at university towns.
How close are those to running your own city?

Doesn't have to be apartheid or lawless or chaotic at all.

Again, this is not about apartheid "forced" separation
but people choosing to work within THEIR OWN communities,
democratically and cooperatively. NOT by coercion or political mandates.​

2. we already have religious organizations that fund and set up their own
schools, hospitals, and mentorship/leadership programs in conjunction with other institutions.

Parties already provide training for their members.
Why not train them in mediating conflicts and managing school districts,
party precincts, even worker or police unions so they solve their own problems internally?

3. Homeowners and Civic Associations already exist which decide their OWN RULES
and process for managing their neighborhoods and residents.

Why not start with that?

4. Nonprofits such as Alternatives to Violence Project (started by Quakers)
and Justice Fellowship and Prison Fellowship (by traditional Christians)
have changed entire prison cultures, where the inmates are like students enrolled
in school programs. So the unit operates more like a school campus under agreed policies.

NOTE: the one area where policies can be MANDATED is where people COMMITTED
an abuse or violation of law that PRESCRIBES loss of liberty or other required restitution or penalty.

Where are you getting that "apartheid" would be forced on anyone?

Maybe in cases where CRIMINALS committed crimes and are too dangerous to be freed in society, those convicts can be required to be detained without equal freedom as others to decide policies, but might be required to work to pay restitution to their victims and to society including taxpayers.

boedicca I included plans for military guarded prisons and teaching hospitals in the proposed border development where people have a CHOICE which areas to fund (either the military and law enforcement bases to deter and detain criminals OR the civilian development of campus facilities and programs for workers and victims of trafficking and other immigration abuses) www.earnedamnesty.org

SEE Constitutional principles (in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) against DEPRIVING citizens of LIBERTY without DUE PROCESS of LAW.

Doesn't APPLYING THE CONSTITUTION AS WRITTEN
PREVENT ANY FORCED APARTHEID?

 

[jwoodie]

There is only one economic system that recognizes human traits and harnesses them into a positive direction: Capitalism. All the rest eventually collapse when the producers in a society are no longer rewarded for their efforts.

the best thing about free enterprise or free market, jwoodie
it respects free will or free choice which is necessary for humans to operate.

so if people want to experiment and choose more socialistic or communistic systems,
they can do so under a free market system.

by separating the groups to take responsibility for their own costs and consequences,
they still have freedom to learn by experience, which is the best teacher.

I agree that people should be free to live as they want, as long as they are not harming others. But they should not expect others to pay for their choices. The best outcome for the greatest number of people is derived from individuals providing for themselves and their families.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is only one economic system that recognizes human traits and harnesses them into a positive direction: Capitalism. All the rest eventually collapse when the producers in a society are no longer rewarded for their efforts.

the best thing about free enterprise or free market, jwoodie
it respects free will or free choice which is necessary for humans to operate.

so if people want to experiment and choose more socialistic or communistic systems,
they can do so under a free market system.

by separating the groups to take responsibility for their own costs and consequences,
they still have freedom to learn by experience, which is the best teacher.

I agree that people should be free to live as they want, as long as they are not harming others. But they should not expect others to pay for their choices. The best outcome for the greatest number of people is derived from individuals providing for themselves and their families.

EXACTLY jwoodie
So this is what boedicca might mean by fearing apartheid separation.

How else can we go about stopping the forced taxation without representation
CURRENTLY in practice, where one party can vote in by majority rule policies against the beliefs/creeds of
other citizens trying to FORCE THEM to pay for those?

boedicca jwoodie
do we need a Voluntary Agreement between party members and leaders to QUIT imposing beliefs on each other forcing funding against the beliefs of one party or another.

Are you saying this separation of taxes can't be forced by law without getting "apartheidish"
but must be by voluntary agreement that it works better?

Currently we don't even require people to believe in or comply with the Constitution anymore.
The parties are both just pushing to pass whatever legislation or ruling they can get away with, constitutional or not,
as long as they get the votes.

What my suggestion was boedicca WITH RESPECT TO FREE EXERCISE OF RELIGION
is to recognize political parties and beliefs as political religions which are a FORM of religion or religious organization.

Just AGREE to recognize this first, and yes it has to be voluntary, because it in itself
involves people's personal beliefs. That perception can never be forced to change.

Then once we RECOGNIZE that we are ALREADY dealing with religious wars of ideology and "apartheid" between parties,
THEN we can organize and AGREE on what reforms or clarifications to the Constitutional process
are necessary to protect democratic representation of people from ALL these parties, beliefs or creeds EQUALLY.

We NEITHER want to ESTABLISH NOR PROHIBIT.
We can neither FORCE nor DENY "segregation of taxes" to prevent
imposing taxations on citizens whose beliefs are NOT represented by said programs or policies pushed by another party.

boedicca do you agree with arguments that citizens
should NOT be forced to pay for programs against their beliefs?

Do you agree this is ALREADY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
but not being enforced because of EXISTING POLITICAL APARTHEID and abuse of majority rule to force this on taxpayers?

If you think the current Constitution is enough to stop abuse of taxpayer money, forced to fund beliefs/creeds against
our will and WITHOUT our representation,
how do YOU propose to correct past abuses and repay restitution to taxpayers whose rights and beliefs were violated?

jwoodie boedicca JWBooth
Wouldn't addressing each party be ONE way to organize corrections to this problem of govt abuse and waste?
How else can we organize petitions to redress grievances and AGREED corrections
by so many people? By state? by party? what do you suggest?