The political science appears to be evolving. Time will tell.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Life Lately
So, last summer I found out my landlord had stopped paying the mortgage and the title was swooped up by someone else. Suddenly, after living in Montecito for almost ten years I was adrift. I really did love where I was living. I could walk to the beach or get on my bike and ride up into the Santa Ynez Mountains. After a court battle and settlement with the company that bought the place (2.5 million property for 560 grand), I then had to find a new place. It’s always dicey finding a new place, but I found out today I was once again lucky. Turns out the new place is right up the street from where I live now. Also built in the 1920s, and with really cool people.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Open Letter To Occupy
Dear Occupy, I’m an educator in an average-sized American city. I’ve been a political activist for a quarter-century and have come to learn how the two-party system destroys political movements for change. The two parties differ on social/economic issues but are united in preventing alteration to their system, so that it’s become a form of institutionalized corruption. The two-party system is the graveyard of movements for change. No one elected to it, and no amount of legislation issued from it, is going to reform it. This is nothing new under the sun, humans have faced various forms of tyranny before, but in our case today this means America
Before considering the language of such an amendment, consider that there are only two ways to propose one: Congress or Convention. Although Congress may occasionally put lipstick on a pig, so to speak, it’s not going to propose an amendment to effectively reform the two-party system. Therefore we’re meant to utilize the only alternative, a convention for proposing amendments.
For many decades both Democrat and Republican politicians have told Americans that if a convention were ever held it might runaway into a national catastrophe which removes rights and/or destroys the Constitution itself. Yet, the two-party system, in practicing politics as usual, providing cover for institutionalized corruption, already has become a national catastrophe, already has removed rights, and already ignores the Constitution. Occupy is a political movement in response to this national catastrophe.
In my years as an activist I’ve been involved in one federal lawsuit and one federal criminal case, both concerned with the convention clause of Article V, and I’ve come to know things about a convention which most citizens do not. First and foremost, while a convention does debate and draft amendments, it does not and cannot make those amendments law. For an amendment to become law it must win approval of the states--not a simple majority of states (50%+), but a supermajority (75%+). This requirement of a supermajority demands a healthy mix of different groups and political persuasions. It demands that an idea must have overwhelming and broad support or it will be discarded. This is a principle based on common sense, not the self-destruct button politicians have told us about. In other words, because supermajorities are required for ratification--a special mix of different constituencies--we can trust in that. We can let go and trust the people and the constitutional process as to what amendment would win approval--and if we don’t trust in that, guess who we’re back to trusting?
Groups diverse as Occupy and Tea Party Patriots and others are displeased with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we’re meant to do that by convoking a convention of state delegates. Occupy could and should lead the way with the idea that amendments need to be discussed on the authority of the Constitution rather than in parks or on the internet; that a convention is a national discussion which the two-party system does not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes, in and of itself alters the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
Occupy is composed of many groups and many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be given top priority. What Occupy as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states without a convention on the authority of the Constitution. Occupy currently has the opportunity to leadAmerica
There are two things now required of us--talent and guts. Talent is not a problem, talent is the pride of the nation--we have the talent to hold a convention, we have the talent to construct amendments which can win the approval of supermajorities. The other part is the guts--do we have the guts to make our government address our demands?
The convention clause of Article V has been satisfied, there are hundreds of state applications on record and one session of Congress after the next simply ignores its constitutional obligation to issue the call. All reformations the world over since history began all come down to one thing: a tipping-point. All we need is roughly 15-20 million Americans cognizant of what a convention is, why the two-party system has done everything within its power to prevent one, and how it will deliver us from the institutionalized corruption of today.
If OccupyWallSt put out the call to all other Occupy cities, and they in turn redirected focus in calling for a convention, we will have one, and in a natural progression of events our high law will deliver us from the two-party system.
Before considering the language of such an amendment, consider that there are only two ways to propose one: Congress or Convention. Although Congress may occasionally put lipstick on a pig, so to speak, it’s not going to propose an amendment to effectively reform the two-party system. Therefore we’re meant to utilize the only alternative, a convention for proposing amendments.
For many decades both Democrat and Republican politicians have told Americans that if a convention were ever held it might runaway into a national catastrophe which removes rights and/or destroys the Constitution itself. Yet, the two-party system, in practicing politics as usual, providing cover for institutionalized corruption, already has become a national catastrophe, already has removed rights, and already ignores the Constitution. Occupy is a political movement in response to this national catastrophe.
In my years as an activist I’ve been involved in one federal lawsuit and one federal criminal case, both concerned with the convention clause of Article V, and I’ve come to know things about a convention which most citizens do not. First and foremost, while a convention does debate and draft amendments, it does not and cannot make those amendments law. For an amendment to become law it must win approval of the states--not a simple majority of states (50%+), but a supermajority (75%+). This requirement of a supermajority demands a healthy mix of different groups and political persuasions. It demands that an idea must have overwhelming and broad support or it will be discarded. This is a principle based on common sense, not the self-destruct button politicians have told us about. In other words, because supermajorities are required for ratification--a special mix of different constituencies--we can trust in that. We can let go and trust the people and the constitutional process as to what amendment would win approval--and if we don’t trust in that, guess who we’re back to trusting?
Groups diverse as Occupy and Tea Party Patriots and others are displeased with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we’re meant to do that by convoking a convention of state delegates. Occupy could and should lead the way with the idea that amendments need to be discussed on the authority of the Constitution rather than in parks or on the internet; that a convention is a national discussion which the two-party system does not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes, in and of itself alters the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
Occupy is composed of many groups and many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be given top priority. What Occupy as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states without a convention on the authority of the Constitution. Occupy currently has the opportunity to lead
There are two things now required of us--talent and guts. Talent is not a problem, talent is the pride of the nation--we have the talent to hold a convention, we have the talent to construct amendments which can win the approval of supermajorities. The other part is the guts--do we have the guts to make our government address our demands?
The convention clause of Article V has been satisfied, there are hundreds of state applications on record and one session of Congress after the next simply ignores its constitutional obligation to issue the call. All reformations the world over since history began all come down to one thing: a tipping-point. All we need is roughly 15-20 million Americans cognizant of what a convention is, why the two-party system has done everything within its power to prevent one, and how it will deliver us from the institutionalized corruption of today.
If OccupyWallSt put out the call to all other Occupy cities, and they in turn redirected focus in calling for a convention, we will have one, and in a natural progression of events our high law will deliver us from the two-party system.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
News From The Front
We finally approved a mission statement. And then as it turned out, right after it was approved, a meeting was called by another working group of the NYC general assembly. Of course I wanted as many people from our group to attend, to get a hand-bill out--a single sheet with the mission statement and rationale/basis for it:
Mission Statement:
Whereas recent court decisions and federal laws enable corporate and special interests to drown out the voices of United States citizens; whereas elected representatives are dependent on corporate and special interests to fund political campaigns; whereas two entrenched political parties have rigged the electoral system to insulate themselves against challenge from other parties; whereas our voting rights are under attack; whereas Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse these trends fatal to self government by the people. We resolve to work with all like-minded individuals and organizations, setting aside those debates which traditionally divide us and undermine our strength in numbers, to unite the voices of the 99% in calling for the Article V Convention so that such amendments may be proposed, debated, and ratified to secure and strengthen democracy for the people of this nation.
Rationale/Basis:
As our mission statement articulates, we as a group within the larger NYCGA, do not believe systemic problems of the electoral process will be reformed by legislation or amendment arising out of Congress--the body actively perpetuating the status quo of politics as usual, the two-party duopoly, and all symptoms which follow. We believe OWS currently has the opportunity to leadAmerica
Groups such as OWS and Tea Party Patriots and others are displaying displeasure with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we are meant to alter and abolish by convoking a convention of state delegates.
As it's Politics As Usual which provides cover for institutional corruption and the two-party system, a convention will stop PAU dead in its tracks as it's a three-part national discussion which politicians and media do not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes it necessitates, in and of itself will alter the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
OWS is composed of many groups, and beyond it, many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be the top priority of the nation. What OWS as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states for ratification without first holding a non-binding deliberative assembly on the authority of the Constitution.
We invite you to join us Saturday, December 3rd, to launch OWS into the next phase in its goal to break the status quo, that fundamental electoral reform may be debated in order to be ratified.
Then we had some e-mail discussion, which led to my reply:
Our group has the solution--not for us alone, but the nation. Millions of Americans are unaware of what OWS means, millions could give [beep] what we think. OWS is now being demonized. The solution our sub-group of NYCGA has identified is a non-partisan idea, indeed the founding principle of our high law--we're meant to alter untenable status quo via convention. If so, it seems common sense the task is to sell that principle to Americans who are either 1) unaware of it, or 2) unaware how it works. I worked with Occupy Santa Barbara for over two weeks, I know first-hand not everyone's opinion holds the same weight. By this I mean some have extensive knowledge which can and will aid the larger group if given the chance.
It seems plot-points of events are fortuitous: our group drafted/agreed to language and then a meeting emerged via Ed Brady. Why would we be shy about what our group's been working on? Why not print a page of our mission statement and its basis?
I do not see this having to do with unilateralism, it's about being a good dog and barking on point. Our dog has identified the solution, right there in our high law. I spoke with Ed Brady today and he inspired me to say what is true: we all have better things to do with our lives than fighting against a tyrannical government. If so, let's cause a convention, trust in the people and the process, so we can all go back to pursuing happiness. And if we don't trust the people, the principle of a convention and its three-part process, guess who we're back to trusting? We need a convention, we needed it 1960s, and here we are today half a century later. Let's put the problem to rest for another hundred years or more. We can do it.
Just hoping things will come together sooner than later....
I have been out there selling the Translations, and really, really want to get to the next book--Othello/Romeo & Juliet. And I also want to get to the sequel to the novel. And I want to write some original plays. And I want to create some sculptures. Sometimes the way I feel is that I'm a sculptor trapped in a crazy poet's body. Oh--and then there's the documentary--trying to get funds together to edit. So much to do, so little time. And last but not least, it sure would be nice to take a walk with someone special--on the beach, a hike in the mountains--maybe a special kiss? That really would be nice. I wonder if that will ever happen. Time will tell--for now, work.
Whereas recent court decisions and federal laws enable corporate and special interests to drown out the voices of United States citizens; whereas elected representatives are dependent on corporate and special interests to fund political campaigns; whereas two entrenched political parties have rigged the electoral system to insulate themselves against challenge from other parties; whereas our voting rights are under attack; whereas Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse these trends fatal to self government by the people. We resolve to work with all like-minded individuals and organizations, setting aside those debates which traditionally divide us and undermine our strength in numbers, to unite the voices of the 99% in calling for the Article V Convention so that such amendments may be proposed, debated, and ratified to secure and strengthen democracy for the people of this nation.
Rationale/Basis:
As our mission statement articulates, we as a group within the larger NYCGA, do not believe systemic problems of the electoral process will be reformed by legislation or amendment arising out of Congress--the body actively perpetuating the status quo of politics as usual, the two-party duopoly, and all symptoms which follow. We believe OWS currently has the opportunity to lead
Groups such as OWS and Tea Party Patriots and others are displaying displeasure with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we are meant to alter and abolish by convoking a convention of state delegates.
As it's Politics As Usual which provides cover for institutional corruption and the two-party system, a convention will stop PAU dead in its tracks as it's a three-part national discussion which politicians and media do not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes it necessitates, in and of itself will alter the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
OWS is composed of many groups, and beyond it, many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be the top priority of the nation. What OWS as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states for ratification without first holding a non-binding deliberative assembly on the authority of the Constitution.
We invite you to join us Saturday, December 3rd, to launch OWS into the next phase in its goal to break the status quo, that fundamental electoral reform may be debated in order to be ratified.
Then we had some e-mail discussion, which led to my reply:
Our group has the solution--not for us alone, but the nation. Millions of Americans are unaware of what OWS means, millions could give [beep] what we think. OWS is now being demonized. The solution our sub-group of NYCGA has identified is a non-partisan idea, indeed the founding principle of our high law--we're meant to alter untenable status quo via convention. If so, it seems common sense the task is to sell that principle to Americans who are either 1) unaware of it, or 2) unaware how it works. I worked with Occupy Santa Barbara for over two weeks, I know first-hand not everyone's opinion holds the same weight. By this I mean some have extensive knowledge which can and will aid the larger group if given the chance.
It seems plot-points of events are fortuitous: our group drafted/agreed to language and then a meeting emerged via Ed Brady. Why would we be shy about what our group's been working on? Why not print a page of our mission statement and its basis?
I do not see this having to do with unilateralism, it's about being a good dog and barking on point. Our dog has identified the solution, right there in our high law. I spoke with Ed Brady today and he inspired me to say what is true: we all have better things to do with our lives than fighting against a tyrannical government. If so, let's cause a convention, trust in the people and the process, so we can all go back to pursuing happiness. And if we don't trust the people, the principle of a convention and its three-part process, guess who we're back to trusting? We need a convention, we needed it 1960s, and here we are today half a century later. Let's put the problem to rest for another hundred years or more. We can do it.
Just hoping things will come together sooner than later....
I have been out there selling the Translations, and really, really want to get to the next book--Othello/Romeo & Juliet. And I also want to get to the sequel to the novel. And I want to write some original plays. And I want to create some sculptures. Sometimes the way I feel is that I'm a sculptor trapped in a crazy poet's body. Oh--and then there's the documentary--trying to get funds together to edit. So much to do, so little time. And last but not least, it sure would be nice to take a walk with someone special--on the beach, a hike in the mountains--maybe a special kiss? That really would be nice. I wonder if that will ever happen. Time will tell--for now, work.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Time Will Tell--Nice To Throw Stuff At Walls
"Whereas, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of corporate and special interests over the interests of United States citizens. Whereas, unlimited private financial contributions within public elections have corrupted the electoral system. Whereas the Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse trends fatal to representative government, it is now self-evident that we, the people of the United States
Latest language of mission statement--shaped by what others in the group said. I lifted “self-evident” from the DOI, trends/fatal/rep/gov phrase from a President Eisenhower speech.
Latest language of mission statement--shaped by what others in the group said. I lifted “self-evident” from the DOI, trends/fatal/rep/gov phrase from a President Eisenhower speech.
“Why disregard the Declaration of Independence as the foundational statement for establishing government or fomenting revolution? Corrupt government should be 'altered or abolished.' What more could a non-violent revolutionary hope for? The DOI sanctions orderly revolution--institutionalized by Article V."
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Dear Planet Earth I Love You
God’s blood this storm passing cross California
Took a job today on the set of a commercial--make a whole month’s rent in a day. That’s a relief. Yes I have had help recently and certainly at points in the past, but it’s true I really do make colorfield art, and I’ve written a novel, a book of translations, good amount of poems, photography--and I’d be a sculptor if I could--which is really what I am, a sculptor; and a sculptor who fails to make it in the world in terms of being able to have access to a yard with metal and tanks for wielding, and blocks of stone and hardened-metal instruments and hammers, is a very, very strange individual--plain and simple. The people who have helped me over the years really are patrons of the arts. We’d all like to be patron of the arts, right? We all want to be comfortable enough we start scholarship programs we wanted. If you’re human being that’s the coolest thing to be, one who made it out there in the world, then funds the arts.
Anyway, running low at present because all the political science: takes time to answer/make/calls/e-mails--as opposed to out selling books. Time-wise--the time it takes to fight to live another day. It’s funny how selling books and writing time are same in that if you put in an eight hour effort you’re guaranteed profits.
It’s touch and go with the NYC general assembly Article V group. I hope they adopt the latest language. I remembered some language from back in 2005, the “reverse trends fatal to representative government…” language. Love that--from President Eisenhower at commencement, a college inDefiance , Ohio
Took a job today on the set of a commercial--make a whole month’s rent in a day. That’s a relief. Yes I have had help recently and certainly at points in the past, but it’s true I really do make colorfield art, and I’ve written a novel, a book of translations, good amount of poems, photography--and I’d be a sculptor if I could--which is really what I am, a sculptor; and a sculptor who fails to make it in the world in terms of being able to have access to a yard with metal and tanks for wielding, and blocks of stone and hardened-metal instruments and hammers, is a very, very strange individual--plain and simple. The people who have helped me over the years really are patrons of the arts. We’d all like to be patron of the arts, right? We all want to be comfortable enough we start scholarship programs we wanted. If you’re human being that’s the coolest thing to be, one who made it out there in the world, then funds the arts.
Anyway, running low at present because all the political science: takes time to answer/make/calls/e-mails--as opposed to out selling books. Time-wise--the time it takes to fight to live another day. It’s funny how selling books and writing time are same in that if you put in an eight hour effort you’re guaranteed profits.
It’s touch and go with the NYC general assembly Article V group. I hope they adopt the latest language. I remembered some language from back in 2005, the “reverse trends fatal to representative government…” language. Love that--from President Eisenhower at commencement, a college in
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
