Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Electoral Movement

Posted 1 year ago on Sept. 22, 2012, 1:06 a.m. EST by ThomasJefferson (10)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Since American society is one of the most developed in the world, has the best chance to realize the next important step for democracy in the current electoral process, requesting candidates that current legislators of their parties pass before election a constitutional amendment that requiring to elected rulers, under penalty of being dismissed and prosecuted, to consensus their decisions and resource management with a free participation Citizens’ Counsel.

For the event that none of the political parties want to formulate the legislative proposal, previously civil society should constitute a list of unregistered candidates for different election positions on November 6th, willing to pass and practice this amendment, performing an electoral movement in which citizenship agree to vote for this list of independent citizens.

Thanks for your consideration and analysis of this pretentious but indispensable proposal.

33 Comments

33 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

How about a plan - PRE APPROVED by 80%


http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

A constitutional amendment to

Overturn Citizens United { CU } and
Corporate Personhood { CP }

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ videos on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich, Nader , Justice Stevens,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Kucinich, Grayson, Yugur Sanders, Hightower, etc.

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

REGULAR MEETINGS:
Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

Our OWS Working Group has one goal -

To support the OWS Declaration
“a democratic government derives
its just power from the people,
not from corporations”

and to do what polls show
80% of Americans want -

To get corrupting money out
of our political system by passing
a Constitutional Amendment that will:

►Reverse the 2010 Supreme Court decision
…Citizens United that enabled super-pacs
►Reverse the 1976 Supreme Court decision
…Buckley that equated money is speech
►Eliminate the 1886 judicially created fiction
…that corporations are people

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

yes - this cuts to the heart of it - much else is but a distraction

[-] -1 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

lol. Yep. Corporate personhood is the heart of the issue. Nevermind an ENTIRE SYSTEM THAT UPHOLDS CORPORATE PERSONHOOD WITH GUNS. I capitalized it so you wouldn't miss it.

Trying to lobby the people with guns to change their minds is stupid. It doesn't change the fact that corrupt people with guns are dictating the way people live. THAT is the heart of it.

But I guess if you think begging your party for some table scraps is freedom, you're welcome to it.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

nobody has a gun in my face. And in fact, I have my own guns.

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

Sure they do. You follow the governments laws, or they put guns in your face. And their laws say that corporations are people. You are not allowed to disagree in action, only in word, or else you directly face the guns of the government. That's why you're crying about it on the message board, instead of taking direct action against corporations; you know you're outgunned. If you BELIEVE different, you're only fooling yourself. This is why you want to get your people into office, with the hopes of turning the government guns AGAINST corporations, who you view to be evil. You want them to make laws (that corporations have to follow, or else they go to jail or get shot) against corporations.

It's simple bro. It's in plain sight. And your abstract denial only means that you'll continue wasting your time on superfluous political action. Hasn't worked for 200+ years, and it still won't. BUUUUT, keep having faith in the Church OF the State. Maybe your blessed leaders will toss you some table scraps after this election. Or maybe not.

[-] 1 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

And you would remove all laws and do what?

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

There is no removal of Natural Law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law

I believe in self-governance. And of course the first response to that is "OMG, EVERYONE WILL BE THROWING MOLOTOV COCKTAILS AT EACH OTHER". Except, most people live without assaulting their neighbors, raping people, and mass murdering, so it's logical and natural to assume that they'd continue to do so if the violence of the state was removed.

" I HEARTILY ACCEPT the motto, — "That government is best which governs least"; and I should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts to this, which also I believe, — "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have."

http://thoreau.eserver.org/civil1.html

[-] 1 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

So then you are advocating Catholicism?

The originator of natural_law.

http://www2.franciscan.edu/plee/natural_law.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09076a.htm

Or in the actual definition?

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Natural_law

In which case, if a behavior could be construed as "natural" it would be OK.

That could include any number of negative behaviors. Very vague ideology to try and pass on to billions of people.

I think I read about your version on the CATO site some time ago.

I seems to be a bastardization of the terms real roots and meaning.

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

You're right. I see your logic so clearly now. Guns and violence in the hands of dictators leads to a peaceful, ordered society. Keep up the great work! Better yet, why keep working? Move to North Korea! :D

[-] 1 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

You do like to think in extremes, don't you.

I already worked for over 40 years, so stop with the assumptive attempts at insult.

Are you going to be another one who can't accept dissent?

One who wants to accept only the facts he's already committed to?

Should I give the link to your dream vacation destination?

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

"Should I give the link to your dream vacation destination?"

"stop with the assumptive attempts at insult."

You can see why you're a total hypocrite, right? Or is that too insulting?

[-] 1 points by shooz (26675) 1 year ago

Pointing out the realities of libe(R)tarianism with a sense of humor, is not being hypocritical.

It's cynicism and satire, with a heavy dose of truth.

I find the very tenents of libe(R)tarianism as it's told around here an insult to humanity.

I do recall Chile.

That's the truth of libe(R)tarianism.

So stop playing high and mighty.

A lot of my cynicism grew from interacting with them here on the site.

It's also where a lot of my points came from.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

your proposal clearly would leave us with no water that was potable.

YOu are insane.

And so no further comment is necessary.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

Yes, governments provide potable water. Or is yours laced with Fluoride?

I suggest you research Fluoride in water, and the dozens of studies showing it's relation to cancer and other illness, and the fact that the govt Fluoridates 65% of the countries water.... Oh wait, more statistics! Facts! God Forbid! Oh noooo!!

Please continue namecalling. I have no cure for willful ignorance.

[-] 2 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

there is no gun in my face. I know there is no gun in my face because there are no bullets flying. there are no bullets flying because there is no gun in my face.

[-] 0 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

So if I put a gun in your face and demand your wallet or your life, you give me your wallet and I walk away, there was no gun in your face because no bullets were flying?

Just let go of perfection, homie. Nobody knows everything. There's no real shame in being wrong, that's the first step to being more right. I understand that it's painfully humiliating to the illusion of your brilliance to have your grade-school arguments logically refuted. It used to happen to me, I understand. Just move on. Move on to something better.

Or grasp to the childhood, inane pseudo-logic fantasy that you're currently holding onto. If you can believe that it's reality hard enough, surely it will be?

Ignorance is bliss...until you're crushed by the things you didn't know. Or maybe all the people who bought houses in 2007, and are now foreclosed on, still think it's blissful? They're just the most recent victims, but plenty more victims are right around the corner. Keep lying to yourself and you'll surely be one.

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

So if I put a gun in your face and demand your wallet or your life,

there is a high probability that one of us is dead.

[-] 1 points by thoreau42 (595) 1 year ago

bravest man on the internet!

[-] 1 points by ZenDog (20504) from South Burlington, VT 1 year ago

rest assured - when I can walk away I do.

When I can't -

  • o well.
[-] 1 points by JustinDM (251) from Atascadero, CA 1 year ago

Nice, thank you for that. I wish we had something like that hear in central California. Our local group does more fighting than anything els. I think they managed to get their numbers down to six last I checked.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

VERY VERY SAD .
similar things have happened here in NYC OWS groups. If I may suggest using our web site as the core to unify your group's efforts towards a single goal and away from dissents & personal conflicts

some people find ANY political action an anathema
if you email the site's admin, he can send you info on how to resolve this

[-] 1 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

To convert the current corporate system in a democratic system we must attack its vulnerable points, which are now in the government positions, whose main power lies in the discretionary management of decisions and public resources.

Let's use the power of citizen vote to take away that power or replace them by citizens who are no longer under corporate orders.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Without a constitutional amendment, a national citizens vote is impossible. Why not pursue what 80% of Americans already agree thay want ? http://corporationarenotpeople.webuda.com

[-] 0 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

What is needed is a popular demand for a constitutional amendment to unify national voting citizen and can impose conditions to favor candidates from the political party whose current legislators formulate the legislative proposal before the day of the election.

While what you mention is the application of 80% of the vote for candidates who promise to pass a constitutional amendment, but assuming that will happen during the next government, this does not ensure to get corrupting money out of the political system.

The only way is consolidating participatory democracy through a Citizens' Counsel of free participation to which elected rulers are obliged to agree on their decision and resource management.

By means of a constitutional amendment that could only pass before election day by citizen vote pressure.

[-] 2 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

A constitutional amendment to

Overturn Citizens United { CU }
and
Corporate Personhood { CP }

For a complete analysis of the amendment issue,

and the text of all amendments,
and our comparison of all of the amendments,
and the Citizens United case transcript,
and the Citizens United decision,
and the Buckley decision,
and analysis of corporate personhood,
and analysis of Article III,
and the ABC News poll on CU / CP,
and the PFAW poll on CU / CP,
and 70+ video clips on CU / CP from

Chomsky, Hedges, Witchcraft, Reich, Nader , Justice Stevens,
Warren, Lessig, Hartmann, Maher, Kucinich, Grayson, Yugur Sanders, Hightower, etc.

JOIN our OWS Working Group:
http://nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy

REGULAR MEETINGS:
Wednesdays 5:30-7:30PM @ 60 Wall St – The Atrium

Our OWS Working Group has one goal -
To support the OWS Declaration

“a democratic government derives
its just power from the people,
not from corporations”

and to do what polls show
80% of Americans want -

To get corrupting money out
of our political system by passing
a Constitutional Amendment that will:

►Reverse the 2010 Supreme Court decision
…Citizens United that enabled super-pacs
►Reverse the 1976 Supreme Court decision
…Buckley that equated money is speech
►Eliminate the 1886 judicially created fiction
…that corporations are people

We will attract candidates to …support an amendment, and we will attract voters to …support an amendment, and we will attract voters to support …candidates who support an amendment

[-] 1 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

I display my first participation in https://www.nycga.net/groups/restore-democracy/forum/topic/530-strategy-session-teach-in-16/

I’m sorry to tell you that you have chosen a wrong amendment.

It is not appropriate try to revoke Supreme Court decisions on which the country has been built for centuries.

The amendment that we should support during this electoral process should serve to end with the discretionary management of public resources, which is the main interest of the political parties and candidates, and first resource for electoral crimes.

Only in this way we will have rulers to serve of the people and not the corporations, and then we will begin to disempower them to transfer it to civil society.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 1 year ago

Sorry Thomas - you are in the minority of 20% who favor citizens united -
and just to bring you up to date
citizens united is NOT an amendment

[-] 0 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

Yes, because I fear that next November 6th 20% will win to 80%.

You're right, I've already corrected amendment by Supreme Court decision.

Greetings!

[-] 1 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

Both proposals are different versions of the same idea, projected with different techniques, which are not contradictory but complementary.

We must try to implement them all, including other partial versions like this plan -PRE APPROVED by 80%, to form several battle fronts that we finally get to unify.

So for example, in addition to ask candidates to sign an affidavit that commits them to support the Free Democracy Amendments, we must make a list of citizens willing to serve as unregistered candidates for different elected positions if before the election day has not passed the constitutional amendment of "Honest elected rulers": requiring to agree on decisions and resource management, under penalty of being dismissed and prosecuted, with a Citizens’ Counsel of free participation.

Such Citizens’ Counsel already exists and consists of emancipator movements as OWS and other NGOs, whose leaders will be the natural leaders of the Citizens’ Counsel, which as will never has official leaders, generally remain anonymous.

The day before the election the Citizens’ Counsel shall publish the names of the candidates for whom should vote those citizens who want to support the Electoral Movement.

Now our probability of success is low, but is a high probability that we will be able to set the direction to be followed by civil society in the following electoral processes in all countries of world, to achieve conquer the Real democracy.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (4899) 1 year ago

Finally! Someone who truly understands.

[-] 1 points by ThomasJefferson (10) 1 year ago

Thank you LeoYo, but then will we consolidate the world revolution in this electoral process?

Best regards.

[-] 1 points by LeoYo (4899) 1 year ago

That's the question that only the future can answer. No one can know just what the actual tipping point will be to get the masses motivated assuming that they will ever become motivated.