Bob Giaquinta for Congress

Democracy

Democracy ?

De.moc.ra.cy- noun - Government by the people, exercised directly or through elected representatives. This is the definition found in most dictionaries. A democratic republic, such as ours, is a plausible form of government, however ours is misused and not functioning properly. Democracy is now also used in a different sense, we seem to use it as meaning human rights. As an example, Iran elected the rulers of the country, but their civil rights, especially towards women, are atrocious, as we interpret them. Basing the laws of the land on religious beliefs is a theocratic system, but if the people vote and authorize it (even if they are only men), is it also a democracy? In the Iranian constitution the rights of women must be based on "Islamic conformity". This means that they don't have the same rights as men. I will use "democracy" as a form of government, and human or civil rights for democracy's connotative meaning.

The major types of governments are dictatorship, military junta, parliamentary republic, democratic republic, monarchy, theocracy, oligarchy, and anarchy. The major economic systems are capitalism, fascism, and socialism (including communism). Mix and match these and you have most of the governments in power today. However, for the past hundred years a new system, which controls the world, has arisen. This system goes by the name of Corporatocracy. With the advent of multinational mega-corporations, the shift of power has gone from the nation states to these corporations. This might be explained as a fascist state encompassing the whole world, with all nations bowing to these corporations, with benefit for the wealthy few. Their goal is maximizing short term profits, not for reasonable profits, and the by-products are the subjugation of the peoples of the world and the destruction of the environment of our planet.

Com.mun.ism- definitions

1. Dictionary- is an economic system characterized by collective ownership of property and the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.
   
2. As defined by the top US policy makers - is the idea that government has direct responsibility for the welfare of its people.
   
3. As interpreted by most US citizens - is the totalitarian government of Russia under Lenin and Stalin, and China under Mao.
   

So we have different understandings of how Communism is perceived. Now that the communist threat is not the fear factor used by the US government, others have to be invented. The "War on Drugs" served for a while, now it is the never-ending "Terrorist Threat".

A dictatorship is probably the most efficient form of government, however dictators are not usually benevolent to their subjects. In recent history, Castro of Cuba is probably the closest that there is. I believe he had the right intentions in his revolution, and may still have them. Unfortunately the revolution came during the cold war. He was a socialist and deposed Batista, who was a US backed puppet dictator, and so Castro was labeled as a "feared communist" by the US government. There was a great discrepancy between the rich and the mass of poor Cubans. Castro sought to have all his people share in the wealth of that nation. He approached the US for aid, but the mention of socialism at that time was a curse word, although thirty years earlier there were many socialists in the US, some even holding congressional and mayoral positions. The real reason was that big business knew Castro was going to nationalize many of their properties and that would not look good in their corporative profits. So we would not trade with him. He had no alternative but to go to the USSR for aid, which further infuriated our government. A few years later we financed the Bay of Pigs invasion. Most of the invading forces were probably Batista's cronies. Castro was scared and allowed the USSR to have nuclear missiles in Cuba. This came close to starting WWIII. We keep pushing him into the corner. I do not condone the imprisonment of people or torture, which are purported, but he fell back to Machiavellian principles, he wanted to stay in power with the chance that things might change for the better. He has kept his word as far as universal education and health care are concerned. Now everyone in Cuba is educated and healthier, and still poor, but if we would rescind our restrictions maybe the lives of the Cubans would be better. What do we have to fear from Cuba, other than exposing that we failed at making an example of them? Socialism may work there.

Machiavellian principles are frowned on in the "free world". The ends justify the means so that the "Prince" (government) is protected. However, if we look at history, civil rights are constantly being curtailed. The US government, during WWII, indentured (sent to concentration camps) Japanese American citizens, some of them 3rd and 4th generation Americans. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are constantly being infringed upon. The latest well known ones, the Patriots and Rico Acts, allow the government to exceed their boundaries. This is not only a recent occurrence but goes back 200 years;

1. Alien and Sedition Act - 1798 President John Adams was being hit hard by the media, and France was threatening war with the US. There were many French people living in the US, and some of our leaders feared that if war did break out these people would be a problem. So this law was enacted so nobody could criticize the president, and thousands of people were deported, with no trials,
   
2. In 1860 Lincoln set the precedent that during war the presidential powers are virtually unlimited. He levied troops and went to war, took unappropriated money to fund war, and suspended Habeus Corpus without approval of congress.
   
3. Espionage Act - 1917 After the US entered WWI, anyone "interfering" with the recruitment of troops could be imprisoned, negating freedom of speech.
   
4. Smith Act - 1940 Anybody who advocates, advises, etc. the overthrow of the government shall be fined or imprisoned.
   
5. McCarthyism - 1950 - There were loyalty investigations in the state department, which soon spread to other non-government industries, "Blacklisting" thousands and altering their lives...
   
6. Gulf of Tonkin Resolution - 1964 Allows the president to go to war without congressional approval. This allowed Johnson to initiate the draft and send 57,000 US men and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese to their deaths. (this incident was misrepresented to the American people, we were at fault in the Gulf of Tonkin incident)
   

"It's the leaders of the country who determine the policy (war), and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along…All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to greater danger." This is a quote from Hermann Goring, Hitler's right hand man, at the Nuremberg Trials! It seems like President Bush the Younger used this tactic only a few years ago, he must have gotten it from one of his puppeteers (advisors) since he is incapable of knowledge or independent thought. The War on Terrorism expanded to Iraq, who had nothing to do with 911. In fact Bin laden hated Saddam as much as the US and Saudi governments, they were not allies. But Iraq had weapons of mass destruction aimed at the U.S. NOT! Surprise, no weapons were uncovered. Yes, Saddam was not a great guy, but there are many more dictators, many given "humanitarian aid" by the US, who are not nice guys. In fact, until he stepped on our toes by invading Kuwait he was on our payroll. So the real reason for the Iraq war was to free the Iraqi people and improve their civil rights. Nah. Could it be we wanted a stronger position in the oil rich middle east to feed the cororatocray? We have lost about 4,000 US soldiers, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi died, and we have spent almost $800 billion dollars on this war. Why? Because we are under attack. All those against the war are traitors. To paraphrase Mark Twain "I am a patriot to the peoples of my nation totally, and a patriot to my government when it is deserving." Patriotism for humanity is the best goal. It should include the rights of dissent, criticism and civil disobedience.

We are now at a crossroad of our civil rights. The past incursions into our rights, usually by the Executive Branch of our government, had an end point. At the end of the wars the rights were returned to the people. However, we now have a war that will never end. Terrorism goes back as far as history, and probably will never end, unless everyone is content with their stations in life. Terrorism is cost effective, and only needs a handful of dedicated agents to dispense. The problem we now face is that the Bush Administration is advocating that the President is above the rule of law. This is the reason that our forefathers fought the Revolutionary War. The US Constitution, although it could use some tweaks, is a pretty good set of laws. The founders recognized that prolonged tyranny was easy compared to prolonged democracy. Their greatest fear was that of an unchecked executive. The constitution tries to separate and balance the power of the three branches, so that no one person could gain control. It gives all persons rights that are indispensable for liberty. These rules and rights are severely threatened at this time.

continue to page 2 of 5