While reading a summary of the closing night of the RNC, I was struck by a statement of President Trump:
“This election will decide whether we will defend the American way of life, or whether we allow a radical movement to completely dismantle and destroy it”
Understand what is being said here. The “American way of life” Trump seeks to defend is one in which:
- The wealthy get wealthier, and the poor … get poorer or stay the same.
- The Whites retain their privilege in society.
- Women remain 70% citizens, and decisions about their bodies are made by men.
- Blacks and minorities are inherently viewed as something untrustworty.
- Militaristic policing is acceptable.
- Bending, exploiting, and cheating the system for personal gain is acceptable
- The rules don’t matter if you have wealth.
- Religion should dictate the rules we follow.
- The dictates are caring about yourself, and leaving others to fend for themselves.
- Election interference by foreign governments or to benefit the party in power is acceptable.
The supposed “radical” movement is one that believes the notion of equal justice applies to all, and that injustice to one is injustice to all. The “radical” movement believes that for society to be healthy, everyone needs the ability to be healthy — in mind, body, and spirit. The “radical” movement believes that government should work FOR the people, not for their personal gain or the gain of their friends. Oh, and that “equal justice”? That also means that wealth does not allow you to bypass justice or societal obligations: you are part of society, you are subject to the rule and you pay for the upkeep of society. Oh, and that “radical” movements believes elections should be fair, and that every citizen should vote and have that vote counted.
Funny, but I don’t see the “radical” group as destroying America. I see them preserving and defending the ideals that made America great, not the invasive attitudes that are destroying it. I see this radical group as building America back, better.
One Reply to “🗳 Struck by a Statement”
The framers of the American Constitution did not believe the common person had the IQ or experience with self governance to run a republican form of democracy. Hence the Electoral College was created. It is my belief that a more equitable form of election process would be some form of proportional representation. By means of of a proportional electoral process, a presidential candidate would need a broad cocencus from the entire national electorate. A candidate would need enough a vote spread in order to be declared a victor. An amount of some 20 to 25% spread would demonstrate the efficacy of the winning candidate. And perhaps the vote could be split. One vote for president and another vote for vice-president. A minority government would require consensus in order to get the business of government done.
Comments are closed.