Joined: 18 Feb 2007
|Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:44 am Post subject: The Constitution: Protection from a Democracy and its evils?
|The Constitution: Protection from a Democracy and its evils?
Not only did the Constitution NOT establish a Democracy, it was actually designed to guard against a Democracy and all the evils that are intrinsic of a Democracy. Consider that which was stated on several occasions in the Constitutional Convention (never being refuted) concerning a Democracy and its evils—and further made clear by Mr. Madison in Federalist Paper No. 10 as to its violence and destructiveness of personal security and rights of property and the nonsense perpetrated by theoretic politicians:
Thursday, May 31, 1787
evils we experience flow from the excess of democracy. The people do not want virtue, but are the dupes of pretended patriots. In Massts it had been fully confirmed by experience that they are daily misled into the most baneful measures and opinions by the false reports circulated by designing men, and which no one on the spot can refute."
Mr. GERRY, "The
Mr. MASON, "He admitted that we had been too democratic"
Mr. RANDf "...observed that the general object was to provide a cure for the evils under which the U. S. laboured; that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy: that some check therefore was to be sought for agst this tendency of our Governments: and that a good Senate seemed most likely to answer the purpose."
Monday, June 18, 1787
Mr. HAMILTON, "...sees the Union, dissolving or already dissolved — he sees evils operating in the States which must soon cure the people of their fondness for democracies"
Monday, September 17, 1787
Mr. GERRY "He hoped he should not violate that respect in declaring on this occasion his fears that a Civil war may result from the present crisis of the U. S. In Massachussetts, particularly he saw the danger of this calamitous event — In that State there are two parties [Cosmopolitans and Localists,] one devoted to Democracy, the worst he thought of all political evils, the other as violent in the opposite extreme. From the collision of these in opposing and resisting the Constitution, confusion was greatly to be feared."
The Federalist No. 10: Madison
"A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
"Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions."
So, using simple common sense, can it not then be reasoned that any faction (or designing man or woman) that promotes that evil at the Federal head, against that which the Constitution was intended to guard, is not only lawless, but is itself (or him/herself) evil?
Perhaps more importantly, what does promoting and spreading this evil in other parts of the world make our Federal government (or make us, as a People and our States for that matter) — a crusade that the Federal government endowed upon itself that is contrary to the Constitution in which there can be found no such enumerated power nor fundamental principle?
(Protected under the copyright laws of the United States of America. You may not reproduce this post without express written permission from the poster. You may, however, disseminate a link to this post in any electronic communication or web page.)