Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Democratic Debate & The Moderate

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 11:17 PM
link   
I am doing this piece because I want people to understand the Moderate party and what it represents. There are many misconceptions about it and this is my intent to clear up those misconceptions. In order to do this, I have decided to go back in History and talk about the two main political parties train of thought throughout American History. And, I’m sure most already know this, but it’s good to have a refresher every now and again. And hey, the good thing about this is it contains very little if any rhetoric. Yes, we’re all guilty of using rhetoric. LOL. Anyhow, here goes:

The Democratic debate began between the Federalists (elite democrats) and the Anti-Federalists (popular democrats) after the Revolution. The Declaration of Independence was signed in 1776 and the “Spirit of 76" or “republicanism” (not to be confused with the Republican party founded in the 1850's) began with ten states establishing constitutions to replace the old colonial charters. And thus we have our first system of national government, a confederation where the states themselves, not the nation were the centers of political life. The Articles of Confederation were adopted in 1777 but not finally approved until 1781 until thirteen states had joined and approved them. This brings us to the Constitution. The Revolutionary spirit had died down between the decade it flourished and the time the Constitution was created because of debts, foreclosures and the scarcity of money. The rural majority was very poor and the state legislature was dominated by powerful bankers and merchants who ignored them. People wanted their state to relieve their stress and petitioned for laws to postpone foreclosures and to allow payment of debts in agriculture commodities. Therefore, in 1786 Shay’s Rebellion took place by desperate farmers because they felt that they were losing everything the Revolution had promised them. As a result, “stay” and “tender laws” were placed into effect and paper money legislation was passed. Their state legislation had responded to their plights. But, the new state laws concerned the conservative and propertied Republicans and lost belief of the core ideas of the ‘Spirit of 76'. To them the rich elite were no longer a threat, but the legislatures were. And this brings us up to the Constitutional Convention of 1787 which was assembled largely because of the developments in the states and a new national government was formed. And the Democratic Debate began. (I’m going to do a piece on the Constitution later, so I’ll leave this part vague for now).

The Anti-Federalists began the Democratic-Republican party in 1792 and was founded by none other than Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in opposition to Alexander Hamilton and the Federalists which was also created in 1792. The Federalists believed that most people were more worried about their own lives than politics, and that when they did get involved in political decisions they tended to get a tad bit emotional and intolerant. To the Federalists a democracy basically meant free and fair elections where the elites rule by competing for votes and that the main goal of a democracy should be to protect the rights of its citizens so they can have the freedom to pursue their own interests. On the contrary, the Anti-Federalists believed that people naturally wanted to participate in decisions that affected their everyday lives and that if they did not participate something would be naturally wrong with the democratic system. They believed that through this participation people could keep a check on their government and that the main threat came from the government itself; not from ordinary citizens. To them a Democracy meant more than fair elections it meant the participation of citizens in decisions that would naturally affect their lives; contrary to the Federalists who believed that political representatives should filter people’s views through their superior expertise, temperament and intelligence.

It basically boiled down to the two sides disagreeing on six basic political issues: human nature, the proper scale of political life, representation, separation of powers and checks and balances, the purpose of government and stability and change. So, on one side we had the Popular Democrats that wanted politics that extended self-government to ordinary citizens and on the other side we had the Elite Democrats who wanted to ultimately leave sovereignty to the people, but believed they should actually be governed by the economic elite.

Now, I could go on through the history of the Whig Party, etc. But, in this piece I’m going to stick to the main parties’ ideologies although other parties were influential throughout our history. So, on we go to the creation of the corporate world.

It seems that our founding fathers did not only disagree on such things as our welfare, but also our Economy. In our early years we were a nation of small farmers and were dependent upon European imports. Alexander Hamilton (Elite Democrat) came up with an idea to curb the reliance on Europe and called for a manufacturing sector that would increase the wealth of our young nation. Naturally, Jefferson opposed Hamilton for promoting industrial capitalism primarily because he felt that it would undermine the Democracy. Jefferson thought that working for a wage compromised citizens’ independence and their willingness to participate in the Democracy for the common good. But, after he was elected President in 1800 his views gradually changed, although he continued believing that an agricultural economy was the best foundation for the Democracy.

Elite Democrats basically believe that markets maximize freedom and minimize power, unlike the government which is complicated by laws and bureaucracy because markets don’t force people to do anything. They have a choice. The plan was that if everyone pursues their own selfish interest, the result is the greatest good for the collective whole. In other words, in modern society if a corporation does not perform to satisfy it’s customers then there will always be new companies willing to supply better goods at cheaper prices. They contend that the market is self-regulating and that government should set rules to ensure fair and honest competition. They also felt that the government should only get involved to correct things such as depressions and that it should provide things to the public such as highways, dams, military protection. Furthermore, they believed that government should take care of those who genuinely can’t compete in the marketplace. But, beyond these policies they believed the government should stay out of it.

Popular Democrats believed in the importance of the markets and private property. However, they contend, that too often corporations use their power and wealth to influence politics and government. Thus, the rising inequalities of the little guy. Small businesses do participate in the market, however they are unable to compete with the corporations due to prices of advertising, tax breaks, price controls and the manipulation of consumer demand. Which means to Popular Democrats that there really isn’t a free market in American Society. They also believe that the corporations only further the monetary inequalities in society while thinking that the capitalism prone to crisis and self-destruction.




posted on Jul, 28 2006 @ 11:18 PM
link   
And now, ladies and gentleman I have given a basic rundown of what the the two main political parties stand for....or rather what they used to stand for. Now comes the fun part! I get to explain the Moderate point of view and we all get to fight over it. Fun, fun! So, here goes. We’re not spineless. We’re certainly not passive. And we most definitely use our voices. The thing is though, that no one wants to hear us. Because that would mean having to face reality and it would certainly undermine the original Democratic Debate. The sad awful truth in my opinion, is that all of our founding fathers were correct in one way or another. Every single one of them hit the nail right on the head on issues. How is this you say? Well, just look at our government and mostly our society.

We are certainly a diverse lot of individuals that come from all over the world. We have many different beliefs. And we are allowed to exercise those beliefs. We come in many different shapes, sizes and colors and no one can legitimately argue that when our constitution was created that it was created for the white landowners. Times they have certainly changed. Our Constitution has expanded somewhat to protect all of our citizens’ rights. And, in order to process that change certain laws had to be created in order to enforce it. Yes, we’re all being conditioned. Human nature at its best.

This change is really what began the great divide in political parties, in my opinion and since these changes have been put into place we began to believe in ideologies instead of political parties. Ideologies are basically world views that are used to form opinions about political issues and to your everyday Democrat and Republican they can be considered extreme. Which leads us to liberalism and conservatism. Liberalism holds a strong belief in equality and in the government’s role in reducing racial, class and gender equalities while conservatism resists the governmental spending programs to actually do this as they feel it retards natural inequalities. Conservatives are also against abortion and they discourage homosexuality. HOWEVER, even though they have some real differences they also have a lot in common. Liberals and conservatives both backed the national security state and the projection of America as a supreme world power. They now agree on social programs and that budget deficits are bad. They also both agree on reducing the size of government. And furthermore they both support the capitalist system, the private ownership of land, factories and assets. This is what our political parties have come to believe it or not....almost one in the same. Although, some people on both sides belong to third parties. Society apparently does not recognize that their leaders have agreed on a more conservative ideology because they still cling to the disagreements from the past. Excluding abortion and gay marriage and some other tiny issues thrown in for good measure.

There are other ideologies, such as Populism that are moving across society, but the one I am here to help you understand is Moderatism. What is it? It is a position between extreme ideologies that have swept through our country (not just liberal and conservative, mind you). It can mean in the Middle or it can mean that a person has strong conservative views on one issue, while having strong liberal views on other issues (like me and your average person, believe it or not). But, politically speaking it means in the Middle. It does not mean you’re spineless and have no opinions or beliefs. It doesn’t mean you don’t care. After all look at me. You can’t say I’m spineless and don’t care. I fight in here all the time. LOL. It just doesn’t mean that you are passive and won’t stand your ground. We’re realists. We see the world for what it is. We see both sides of our Founding Father’s arguments for what they were and we see that they were right....on both sides of the fence. And that’s why people don’t want to hear us. Because reality is a hard thing to face. Popular democracy basically failed us because we handed more and more power to the Feds, and now our leaders are becoming more and more in agreement with the Elite. Which will fail us too. I’m not here to sway you to my position. I’m here only to help you understand what we stand for. We stand for the greater good of what our Founding Fathers wanted this country to be and to represent. And yes, that includes both sides of their thinking. We’re thinkers and we look for new ways to overcome the challenges in our society today. Such as how to make things better, how to change things and how to admit that we’ve been wrong in this debate all of these years. I’m not saying that everyone has to agree all of the time and that we’re mediators. I’m saying we’re fair. We’re honest. We’re quite blunt with our honesty. We realize society can’t handle complete freedom to do as they wish. But, at the same time we realize that legislation and laws are taking over and ruling our lives. And we realize that Corporate America and globalization is a very real threat to our society. But, at the same time we realize that Society is what has caused and will continue to cause Corporations to flourish. Our policies at the moment...I don’t think they’re all that great. But, we had to start somewhere and we definitely have to spend some major time on them, but I think eventually it will be a great movement.....once we move that is. The Moderate Political party has been formed and only time will tell if we can pull it together and get it to take off. So, we’ll see.

Anyhow, I didn’t have anything better to do tonight then type all of this up. I’ve been wanting to do it for a long time and just never got around to it. If you have questions or want to understand us further, I will be more than willing to discuss anything I have knowledge of and yes, I know I’m going to have some foaming at the mouth in here to put everything I’ve said down....so as I like to say, bring it on.

Nighty night.

References: The Democratic Debate. Miroff, Seidelman, Swanstrom. 2002

[edit on 28-7-2006 by zenlover28]





new topics
 
0

log in

join