"Democracy Spring" Plans for Immediate Public Civil Disobedience Have Been Issued

a reply to: crazyewok

The constitution hasn't worked in the first place.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: crazyewok

The constitution hasn't worked in the first place.

Because your base political system was broken.

If it was easier for the people to have a say in removing corrupt career politicians then ithe constitution would be better protected.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: crazyewok

The constitution hasn't worked in the first place.

i t worked UNTIL they decided to try and simplify the election process.

The Young Turks have some reports. Doesn't look like an agenda-infested BS feast to me.



Calling for democracy is bad now 'cause Soros might be involved? And what if one of his NGO's accidentally did something good? Doesn't happen, ever? Yeah. Right.

Soros funded civil disobedience, don't do that either!

update today April 12th

more arrests !!

Arrests made as hundreds of elderly Americans protest at 2nd ‘Democracy Spring’ sit-in

Hundreds of Americans, many of whom are elderly, marched in support of political reform in Washington, DC, taking part in a sit-in and risking arrest as they pushed for fairer elections. RT's 'Redacted Tonight' host Lee Camp was one of those detained.

Already, multiple arrests have been made, according to reports from those on the ground near the demonstrations.

a reply to: xuenchen

more arrests

And more and more and more and...

During daytime and afternoon news segments, CNN did not devote any coverage to the actions. MSNBC mentioned the protests for approximately 12 seconds, while Fox News mentioned the arrests and discussed the protests for about 17 seconds.

Cable News Devotes 30 Seconds to Mass Arrests Protesting Political Corruption

The New World Oligarchy isn't amused.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Strange how and why the MSM is minimizing this effort.

Hmmm.

a reply to: xuenchen

MSNBC and Fox News not only provided minimal coverage, but hosts on both networks misrepresented the protests, claiming they were narrowly focused only on “voting rights issues.” The focus on systemic political corruption, an issue that was widely criticized during the rally yesterday, was ignored. Later in the day, CNN posted a short item on its website. The protests were widely covered by CSPAN, Al Jazeera, and NPR, among other outlets. But cable news programs, which specialize in American political news, were another story.
...
The parent companies of cable news networks are closely tied to the Washington establishment being challenged by protesters on Monday, both spending and receiving some of the big money the protesters are complaining about.

Just a conspiracy theory. Don't. Bother!

An odd casualty......

reporter for The Young Jurks Cenk Uygur ......


Cenk Uygur ARRESTED At Democracy Spring Protest In Washington D.C.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

What you seem to be implying is that democracy is always a good thing. Interestingly, we already have democratic voting etc here but Marxists have been wanting to change our representative republic to "democracy" for some time. What they really want is direct democracy, because we already have a representative republic with democratic elements. Our Founding Fathers knew that direct democracy would be ruination because the masses can rule with stupidity and minority will not be represented.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

The Swiss Republic is able to combine direct democracy with representation and is far from being a tyrrany of the masses, which you seem to imply. In other words: what the eff are you rambling about?
Also, take this as a hint:

America is no longer a democracy — never mind the democratic republic envisioned by Founding Fathers.

Rather, it has taken a turn down elitist lane and become a country led by a small dominant class comprised of powerful members who exert total control over the general population — an oligarchy, said a new study jointly conducted by Princeton and Northwestern universities.

America is an oligarchy, not a democracy or republic, university study finds

a reply to: PublicOpinion

What I'm talking about is the reason why our Founding Fathers rejected mob rule. Also I'm curious why over the loudspeaker that woman is going on about the right to
Vote. Already women minorities etc have the right to vote. Oh wait it's illegals and Syrian refugees they want rights for, cause everyone else already has that. It's clear that progressives want very badly to change the rules so that illegals and such don't have to prove they are legit citizens to vote. They figure if they can sway enough voting blocs to their screwed up Marxist agenda they can accomplish their goals so much faster. We'll goody for the Swiss... What kind of Constitution do they have?
You imagine that direct democracy by the American Public is going to turn around all the elitism. Funny how those odd videos show people don't even know who the Vice President is and it will be the radicals who get their way.

a reply to: crazyewok

The only part of the Constitution that has any actual power is the second amendment, not because it actually has any power but because so many people would go nuts if it was touched.

I remember in high school or undergrad classes discussions regarding the best economy best political system, etc. I dont remember much nor do i agree or disageeebut I remember the professor I believe explained how communism is in theory the optimal form of economy but only in theory cuz once you introduce the human variable, people desiring different things, skill levels, willingness to work, it becomes a mess and can be chalked up to utopia.I DID more or less agree with the theory he proposed though that monarchy is often the best political system which blew me away til he explained if you aren't stuck with a corrupt family then monarchs are raised learning nothing but how to govern so they have lots of experience when they come to power, second they see their country as their precious belonging and have hanging over all of their decisions the deep desire to keep it running as whole and happy as possible since the last thing they'd want to do would be tick off the population and have them kick the monarch out. It eliminates the problem of majority rule when majorities can be amassed whose opinion does not coincide with civil rights or whatever. And lastly they know that every decision is going to come back to them and an unpopular decision can mean their power or the lives of their entire family. And then we looked at some examples of the most peaceful times, longest peace times, happiest populations, etc. and he showed how they most often occured in monarchies with a decent popular ruling family. I dont remember if this also ended up being just in theory but I thought it was interesting and though it only slightly relates to this, it does enough.

Edit-and i dont know for certain but I doubt this includes places like UK where the monarch is head of state and legislative and executive powers are held by a kiiiinda similar to the US bicameral system. So not ceremonial constitutional monarchies but constitutional monarchies where the king queen grand duke prince princess etc is head of the governing body i guess all the way down to absolute monarchy.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

The Founding Fathers didn't have an oligarchy in mind either, did they? To your question regarding the Swiss:

In 1891, the constitution was revised with unusually strong elements of direct democracy, which remain unique even today

Switzerland Wiki

125 years of direct democracy and no mobrule as of yet, ask any Swiss in case of doubt. Now scream and run in circles, the mob is after... you!