Posted 10 years ago on June 8, 2012, 2:40 p.m. EST by LeoYo
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
Declaration of Independence 1776
"Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless. A single zealot may commence persecutor, and better men be his victims. It can never be too often repeated, that the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money, and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."
Thomas Jefferson (Notes on the State of Virginia) 1781
"Experience has taught us, that men will not adopt and carry into execution measures the best calculated for their own good, without the intervention of a coercive power."
George Washington in a letter to John Jay dated August 1, 1786
"In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other."
Benjamin Franklin in his address to the Constitutional Convention dated September 17, 1787
"Those who contend for a simple democracy, or a pure republic, actuated by the sense of the majority, and operating within narrow limits, assume or suppose a case which is altogether fictitious. They found their reasoning on the idea, that the people composing the Society, enjoy not only an equality of political rights; but that they have all precisely the same interests, and the same feelings in every respect. Were this in reality the case, their reasoning would be conclusive. The interest of the majority would be that of the minority also; the decisions could only turn on mere opinion concerning the good of the whole, of which the major voice would be the safest criterion; and within a small sphere, this voice could be most easily collected, and the public affairs most accurately managed."
"We know however that no Society ever did or can consist of so homogeneous a mass of Citizens. In the savage State indeed, an approach is made towards it; but in that State little or no Government is necessary. In all civilized Societies, distinctions are various and unavoidable. A distinction of property results from that very protection which a free Government gives to unequal faculties of acquiring it. There will be rich and poor; creditors and debtors; a landed interest, a monied interest, a mercantile interest, a manufacturing interest. These classes may again be subdivided according to the different productions of different situations & soils, & according to different branches of commerce, and of manufactures. In addition to these natural distinctions, artificial ones will be founded, on accidental differences in political, religious or other opinions, or an attachment to the persons of leading individuals. However erroneous or ridiculous these grounds of dissention and faction, may appear to the enlightened Statesman, or the benevolent philosopher, the bulk of mankind who are neither Statesmen nor Philosophers, will continue to view them in a different light."
"Divide et impera, the reprobated axiom of tyranny, is under certain qualifications, the only policy, by which a republic can be administered on just principles."
A few selected thoughts of James Madison from a letter written to Thomas Jefferson dated October 24, 1787
"If, then, control of the people over the organs of their government be the measure of their republicanism, and I confess I know no other measure, it must be agreed that our governments have much less of republicanism than ought to have been expected; in other words, that the people have less regular control over their agents, than their rights and their interests require."
Thomas Jefferson in a letter to John Taylor dated May 28, 1816.
"Hamilton’s financial system had then past. It had two objects. First as a puzzle, to exclude popular understanding and inquiry. Secondly, as a machine for the corruption of the legislature; for he avowed the opinion that man could be governed by one of two motives only, force or interest: force he observed, in this country, was out of the question; and the interests therefore of the members must be laid hold of, to keep the legislature in unison with the Executive. And with grief and shame it must be acknowledged that his machine was not without effect. That even in this, the birth of our government, some members were found sordid enough to bend their duty to their interests, and to look after personal, rather than public good."
Thomas Jefferson in "Anas" dated February 4, 1818
In the beginning...
The Founding Fathers, on September 12, 1787, had voted against a national Bill of Rights (that later had to be insisted upon as a consideration by certain state legislatures for the ratification of the Constitution and didn't protect people at the state level until the 14th Amendment).
During and after the Constitutional Convention, legislation for the People to recall their federal representatives had been rejected.
In 1791, the Whiskey Tax had been passed favoring eastern big business while burdening western small business resulting in rebellion.
In 1798, the Alien and Sedition Acts had been passed and only enforced against critics of the Federalist Party.
Consider the form of government that the Founders had instituted in contrast to a form of government similar to a Democratic Congress http://occupywallst.org/forum/amendment-for-a-democratic-congress/ that the Founders (including James Madison) would have been opposed to simply for being a democracy http://occupywallst.org/forum/a-democracy/ . Also consider the actual democracy that has existed in Switzerland since 1891 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland that the United States Congress has never considered for the American people.
A democracy is rule by the people be it by direct initiative or by representatives directly accountable to the people through recall and the legally enforced obligation to represent their will.
The American form of government is a popular aristocracy by which the members of the aristocracy are legitimized to legislate via popular election.
The mere existence of popular election without direct control over those elected is not nor has ever been a democratic form of government.
The United States of America has never been a democracy.
As observed by Thomas Jefferson in 1816 and as confirmed nearly 200 years later by the 2014 study
"Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens" http://www.princeton.edu/~mgilens/Gilens%20homepage%20materials/Gilens%20and%20Page/Gilens%20and%20Page%202014-Testing%20Theories%203-7-14.pdf
the well funded business interests of the American elites behind elected representatives have sustained conditions of political unaccountability resulting in a corporate run government unfavorable towards the interests of the American people.
We like to refer to our elected officials as being our public servants yet Thomas Jefferson had plainly referred to them as being our rulers. Under the form of government agreed upon by the Founding Fathers, the electing body must obey the laws of the elected body. The electing body cannot create laws for itself. The electing body cannot revoke the laws of the elected body and the most that the electing body can do to affect the members of the elected body who choose not to represent the interests of the electing body is to continue electing members to the elected body. We are obliged to abide by their decisions but they are in no way obliged to abide by our public interests. So, who is truly the servant? ("None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.") In short, while people talk of fascism as a growing danger to American freedom, the Founding Father republicanism of restricting the people to a popular aristocracy had been detrimental to American freedom from the start. What just and selfless cause in the interests of liberty could a group of men have had in establishing themselves (or their class) above the collective will and revocation of the people? As they had plainly known, a non-initiative, non-referendum, non-recall, representative republic is a restrained republic, an imposition upon the political freedom of the American people, denying them the status of being a sovereign people.
So, in the beginning, in what way had America been a free country?
If America hadn't been a free country at that time, then, at what point in history did America ever become a free country?