Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Rule of Law Under Attack
Every law student promptly learns the national ideal that our country is governed by the rule of law, not the rule of men. Today, the rule of law is under attack. Such activities have become a big business and, not surprisingly, they have involved big business.
On October 25th, Secretary Condoleeza Rice officially recognized before a House Oversight Committee that, remarkably, there was no law covering the misbehavior of Blackwater Corporation and their private police in Iraq.
Any crimes of violence committed by Blackwater and other armed contractors commissioned by the Defense and State Departments to perform guard duty and other tasks, fell into a gap between Iraqi law, from which they have been exempted by the U.S. military occupation and the laws of the United States.
Since the United States government is ruled by lawless men in the White House who have violated countless laws and treaties, Bush and Cheney clearly had no interest in placing giant corporate contractors operating inside Iraqi jurisdiction under either the military justice system or the criminal laws of the United States.
Presidential power has accumulated over the years to levels that would have alarmed the founding fathers whose constitutional framework never envisioned such raw unilateral power at the top of the Executive branch. Accordingly, they only provided for the impeachment sanction. They neither gave citizens legal standing to go to court and hold the Presidency accountable, or to prevent the two other branches from surrendering their explicit constitutional authority-such as the war-making power-to the Executive branch. The federal courts over time have refused to adjudicate cases they deem "political conflicts" between the Legislative and Executive branches or, in general, most foreign policy questions.
Being above the law's reach, Bush and Cheney can and do use the law in ways that inflict injustice on innocent people. Politicizing the offices of the U.S. Attorneys by the Justice Department, demonstrated by Congressional hearings, is one consequence of such Presidential license. Political law enforcement, using laws such as the so-called PATRIOT Act, is another widespread pattern that has drag netted thousands of innocent people into arrests and imprisonment without charges or adequate legal representation. Or the Bush regime's use of coercive plea bargains against defendants who can't afford leading, skilled attorneys.
Books and law journal articles have been written about times when government violates the laws. They are long on examples but short on practical remedies of what to do about it.
Corporations and their large corporate law firms have many ways to avoid the laws. First, they make sure that when Congress writes legislation, the bills advance corporate interests. For example, numerous consumer safety laws have no criminal penalties for the violations, or only the most nominal fines. The regulatory agencies often have very weak subpoena powers or authority to set urgent and mandatory safety standards without suffering years or even decades of corporate-induced delays.
If the laws prove troublesome, the corporations make sure that enforcement budgets are ridiculously tiny, with only a few federal cops on the beat. The total number of Justice Department attorneys prosecuting the corporate crime wave of the past decade, running investors, pensioners and workers into trillions of dollars of losses and damaging the health and safety of many patients and other consumers, is smaller than just one of the top five largest corporate law firms.
Out in the marketplace, environment and the workplace, the corporations have many tools forged out of their unbridled power to block aggrieved people from having their day in court or getting agencies or legislatures to stand up for the common folk.
Companies can wear down or deter plaintiffs from obtaining justice by costly motions and other delaying tactics. When people get into court and obtain some justice, the companies move toward the legislature to restrict access to the courts. This is grotesquely called "tort reform"-- which takes away the rights of harmed individuals but not the corporations' rights to have their day in court.
Lush amounts of campaign dollars grease the way for corporations in the legislatures in the fifty states and on Capitol Hill.
As if that power to pass their own laws is not enough, large corporations become their own private legislatures. You've been confronted with those fine-print standard form agreements asking you to sign on the dotted line if you wish to secure insurance, tenancy, credit, bank services, hospital treatment, or just a job.
Those pages of fine print are corporations regulating you! You can't cross any of them out.
You can't go across the street to a competitor- say from Geico to State Farm, or from Citibank to the Bank of America, because there is no competition over these fine-print contracts, with their dotted signature lines. Unless, that is, they compete over how fast they require you to give up your rights to go to court or to object to their unilaterally changing the terms of the agreement, such as in changing the terms of your frequent flier agreement on already accumulated miles
Oh, for the law schools that provide courses on the rule of men over the rule of law.
Oh, for the time when there when there will be many public interest law firms working just on these portentous dominations of concentrated power to deny open and impartial uses of the laws to achieve justice and accountability.




41 Comments so far
Show AllOh, for the time when a patriot such as Ralph Nader could be president!
The USA is corrupt beyond any redemption short of massive revolution
Ralph is absolutely right about corporate over-reach affecting every aspect of our lives. He has also proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he could not get elected President, but could draw off enough vote to assure a Republican victory.
Elect your Democrats in 2008. They are all you've got as a weapon against corporate creep, and Ralph has proven it. He is concluding with "Oh, for a time when....as though there is such a time or ever was.
You're losing. Stop losing.
ralph nader needs to support a candidate and throw his heavy duty weight behind him. nader has and is doing more good right where is he. like gore, they have both had their shot. to repeat, nader can do more good where he is.
NADER UNDERSTANDS THE DECLINE OF COMPETITION
Below is a comment lifted directly from salon.com on an article by Robert Reich and executive pay. It provides some insight on what Nader explains above, particularly in the context of Reich's assertion that the high pay of today's CEO is justified.
FROM SALON.COM
Robert Reich and Executive Compensation
by Urgelt
10/26/2007, 4:35 PM #
Reply
As Clintonians go, Reich has always impressed me. He's written some penetrating insights. He seems to have a conscience. People like him. Things didn't go horribly awry on his watch.
Did they?
Oh, heck no! The economy did well, and we even started to reduce the national debt there, for about 3 seconds, before Bush stole an election and started a whole other trend the other way. Compared to the Bushies, Reich looks like a saint, doesn't he? Aside from the fact that labor took a nose-dive under on his watch. That's forgivable, nobody likes labor.
There's just one thing wrong with this picture.
Reich was a hands-off, business-friendly, cut-the regulations operator. Reich helped put a nice-guy face on the most dangerous thing government could possibly do to markets.
I've always wondered about this. If he's as sincere as he presents himself, and I have no reason to doubt it, then why doesn't he speak out against monopoly capitalism made possible by Clintonian regulatory policies? Banks gobbling banks, insurers gobbling insurers, oil companies gobbling oil companies, telecoms gobbling telecoms, media companies gobbling media companies... before he left office the market looked like a pool of pirranhas at feeding time, fish gobbling up other fish like mad, each trying to carve out enough market power to institute extractive pricing, or to cook the books to make themselves attractive for buy-outs at inflated prices. The enthusiasm for consolidation reached such a fever pitch that some of the acquisitions were done hastily and without adequate due diligence, with predictably awful results for profits. Of course, under Bush, it got a lot worse, but it didn't start under Bush.
During the last 15 years, risks gone sour didn't matter when it came to executive pay. The thing boards wanted to see was market power, not profits. The lid had been lifted, time to grab. To the extent that CEOs succeeded in advancing their corporations towards monopoly power over markets, they were rewarded.
Monopolies are the holy grail of capitalism. Monopolies are gold mines of profit, bulwarks against labor. Left to its own devices, competition will produce a winner, and everyone else sells out and goes home. That winner isn't necessarily the one with the best product or price, either; it's the one with the cleverest legal and financial departments, the one whose image-making best hides weakness, the one able to engineer the wickedest deals.
If you evaluate some of the most spectacular business failures over the last decade, what you'll find is not pure personal greed, but pure, driving desire for monopoly power. That's what Enron and Global Crossing were trying to accomplish. When regulations relaxed, they had a shot at parlaying small companies into a global giants. That was what made all those crazy risks worth taking.
That's why amazing executive compensation packages took off - what's scarce isn't executive talent, but a particular *kind* of executive talent, the kind that can advance a business towards monopoly power, the kind with gee-whiz accounting tricks up their sleeves and contacts with the big acquisition players, the kind who can tap vast, no-questions-asked credit lines from investment bankers, the kind with the guts to roll the dice for a big pay-off, and the kind who know how to load the dice.
And that's why those convicted of wrong-doing feel no remorse. To them, the pursuit of monopoly power is a noble cause, the ultimate good for share-holders.
Reich was an enabler. And you know what? Nothing has changed. The Clintons are still "business-friendly," friendly to business money flowing into their pockets, friendly to free trade agreements which create bigger playgrounds for monopolies to emerge, and friendly to deregulation.
Nearly 7 years into the Bush presidency, we've seen even more deregulation, more consolidation of market power into fewer hands. I don't know how Reich feels about that. But let's not forget that he played in the game.
All this fussing about irrational, cronyistic executive compensation misses the point. It's supremely rational, and unless you understand why, you'll never be able to figure out how to reign it in.
CORRECTION
The comment above was taken from slate.com, not salon.com.
I heard an interesting discussion with Italian philosopher Antonio Negri (who has been imprisoned in the past, labeled a "terrorist" by the Italian government) who offered some terms for thinking through the new state of politics today, and specifically the disintegration of the "Left" in both the US and Europe. First, quoting someone else (I forgot who), he said that politics is currently dominated by an "extremism of the center," which I thought was apt and useful as a term. Second, he something about "laws" and the "rule of law" being no longer effective in the current paradigm, and that progressives need to understand the new ground upon which they are operating.
Anyway, it made me think that we keep calling for a legal/governmental solution to the current US crisis (i.e. impeachment), but sadly things have changed so much we will never get satisfaction there. Blackwater is merely the most obvious symptom of the new lawless grey area that corporations working in conjuntion with governments have been able to create.
We have to ask: what is driving events and how? How can the force driving these events be derailed? How do we deal with this new situation in which the laws themselves no longer operate? Perhaps the Constitution itself needs to be rewritten in order to preserve the rights of the individual in the age of the corporate leviathan...
"We have to ask: what is driving events and how? How can the force driving these events be derailed? How do we deal with this new situation in which the laws themselves no longer operate?"
Negri would probably say "Use the new rules against Empire, so that they're forced to capitulate." Read Empire (Hardt and Negri) for details.
Here's Ralph Nader complaining about how the airlines change "the terms of your frequent flier agreement on already accumulated miles."
What an outrage! Why don't I care?
The earth is dying, and Ralph Nader is still stuck in some sort of low-rent "consumer activism" from the Sixties.
Maybe there really is too much fine print on my Geico contract.
I don't care!
The next prez will be just like the former prez. he/she will do the bidding of the military-industrial-corporate complex. if any grass roots movement should carry a true progressive, socially minded candidate to victory in an election, he would promptly be assassinated. it's too late for hope. the thugs have taken over and they have their own army (aptly named Blackwater) to ensure absolute control. comply or die!
I will never trust another Democrat in the United States as long as I live.
If Ralph Nader would ask every American who loves the Constitution to go to their local Post Office on a specific date to show his/her support for his candidacy for President of the United States to REPRESENT US in our democracy, I would go. I would go and stay all day. I would bring coffee and tea and cookies and petitions and whatever it would take to save our democracy.
I watched Naomi Wolf's speech this evening on YouTube and I realized we need a movement that is real and truly American at it's core. Whether Republican or Democrat, Libertarian or Far Right Wing Evangelistic. We are all Americans with one Constitution and for once in our political lives we must brave it all to come together to save it. For ourselves and all posterity.
Please Ralph. Help us. We desperately need leadership that is not afraid of the truth...whether on 9/11 or where ever it may lead us. For without truth we will die.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjALf12PAWc
"First, quoting someone else (I forgot who), he said that politics is currently dominated by an "extremism of the center," which I thought was apt and useful as a term"
There is no political center at all: the term "centrist" is used to justify solely those who justify purportedly left-wing or democratic (small d) candidates in supporting wars, war spending & expanding police departments & police powers, while pretending to be friends of the very citizens that will be bilked, arrested, drafted (whether they call it a draft or not).
Hey hey Ralphie boy! Gore/Nader Green Party 2008! A winning ticket!
Bear with me on this...I haven't thought it all out clearly.
In olden times there was a law for the nobility, and another for the peasantry. We remember all those stories about the unfairness of it all. (We also remember that we have been taught that now things are better and fairer.)
In the past century we have had the establishment of a new nobility. Except it isn't made of individual human beings, but rather of business and government corporations.
Business corporations are like ADM, IBM, Microsoft,Bechtel, Boeing, and so on...
Government corporations are like Pentagon, FBI, DEA, and so on...
The corporations act to maintain and increase their market share.This is their moral premise, the starting point for a corporation's ethics and actions.
The idea of globalization, with help of IMF, World Bank, UNO, free trade and such is to establish one law for this new nobility, and another law for individual human beings.
The actions of the group that controls the governmental levers of power suggest that they represent the new nobility. What they do makes sense in that it redounds to the benefit of the new nobility.
The new peasantry is to be controlled, Marx's proleteriet, there to be used when needed, cast aside when not.
The real state is the nobility, and terms like 'America's interests' are referring to the interests of only that new nobility.
Political parties are corporate organizations, with more in common with other corporations than with individual human beings.
I wonder (in my luddite way) if one answer for us individuals is an old kind of corporation of our own. Go back to the model that deTocqueville thought that he saw, the community organization, town hall, the de-centralized human sized entity.
(Aren't there local community councils in their hundreds that have taken a stand on impeachment, end-the-war,save the environment now? But they don't have enough power)
"Elect your Democrats in 2008. They are all you've got as a weapon against corporate creep, and Ralph has proven it."
Ah, Daniel David, our resident George Orwell.
Danny, don't you have some important work waiting for you in Room 101?
You, sir, are the worst sort. You suck the fight out of people and replace it with paralyzing fear. The worst sort.
Well, well, here's some information I just found. Nancy Pelosi's rating in her own district has fallen lately and is now lower than her approval rating, but nobody from California in Congress is doing well:
Voters' contempt for Congress rises
POLL: PELOSI'S NUMBERS TAKE ANOTHER DIVE
10/27/2007
WASHINGTON - California voters continue to disapprove of Congress even more than they do of President Bush, and for the first time Speaker Nancy Pelosi's ratings are more negative than positive, according to a Field Poll released today.
The poll found that 22 percent of state voters approve of Congress' job performance, with 64 percent disapproving. The discontent was bipartisan, with 70 percent of Republicans, 63 percent of independents and 58 percent of Democrats giving Congress negative marks.
Those findings, taken in a survey of 1,201 voters from Oct. 11 through Oct. 21, track national surveys. A Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll during the same period also found a 22 percent approval rating for Congress. A CBS Poll registered a 27 percent approval rating.
Bush earned a 27 percent approval rating from voters in the same Field Poll.
Political analysts give several reasons for the low marks: Democratic voters' dissatisfaction over the inability to change Iraq war policy, Republicans' opposition to Pelosi and other Democratic leaders, and a sense by many voters that Congress can't come to grips with tough issues such as immigration.
"Republican reaction has remained about the same this year, but the real trend is that rank-and-file Democrats and non-partisans are displeased because they expected more from the Democratic Congress," said Mark DiCamillo, director of the Field Poll.
Pelosi, a San Francisco Democrat, earned a 48 percent approval rating in March, two months after Democrats took over Congress. That dropped to 39 percent in August and 35 percent in October, with 40 percent disapproving and 25 percent registering no opinion.
"Iraq is the anchor weighing down Bush," DiCamillo said, "and now it's an anchor on Pelosi because of the complete inability of Congress to change course on the war."
Pelosi and other Democratic leaders held meetings in the last week to find ways to improve their "message" about what they call the New Direction Congress, highlighting such legislation as the minimum wage increase and ethics reform.
Despite the low marks for Congress, Republicans had little to cheer about in the new Field Poll. Voters gave an approval rating of 34 percent to Democrats in Congress, and 20 percent to Republicans.
Only 29 percent of Republican voters in California approved of the GOP performance in Congress, with 53 percent registering disapproval.
"That 2-to-1 disapproval by their own party really jumps out," DiCamillo said. "Republicans in Congress are now playing 'prevent defense' for Bush on the war and on domestic issues, and Republicans in this state do not approve of that."
The state's two senators, Democrats Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, earned higher marks than Pelosi and Congress overall, but the approval ratings for each senator dropped 10 percentage points since March.
The survey showed that 51 percent of all voters approved of Feinstein's job, with 31 percent disapproving. Boxer's approval rating was 44 percent positive and 35 percent negative.
http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_7297497
Jacob Freeze..Maybe you are missing the gist of Nader's piece. I believe he is saying that corporations...private and government...have put themselves above the law by circumventing, rewriting or just ignoring the rule of law to the detriment of the American citizen. By now, bush and his "illegal" team have probably done this thousands, maybe tens of thosands of times. Nader is looking for some way to combat this lawlessness. Illegality is the basis of the entire admin/cabal that has destructed our nation and Constitution. The earth is dying because the government and corporations have found ways around laws that have attempted to protect our environment. They are in essence destroying the Laws of Nature.
Abbywood...I've become so cynical of the entire system of elections and government, that I have no intention of voting for the lesser of two evils in 2008..Hillary ...and of course, not any Republican. As much as I agree with some of Ron Pauls policies, since he is still a Repub, I cannot trust him.. BUT, if Ralph Nader ran, I would vote; such is the trust I have in a man of his impeccable character and integrity. I know I am dreaming, but what the hell is left? Without Nader, I truly believe a People's Revolution is called for...maybe following a nationwide People's Referendum initiated and run by WE the People!!!!!!
"Blackwater and other armed contractors ..., fell into a gap between Iraqi law, from which they have been exempted by the U.S. military occupation..."
Can't the Iraqi legislature change the law to outlaw Blackwater? Or are they powerless puppets used by Americans to continue the war.
Turd
While Bush and Cheney are indeed guilty of numerous, heinous crimes, let's not forget their co-conspirators on both sides of the congressional aisle, in the majority of media organizations, in innumerable think tanks and lobbying groups, and among the conservative clergy and their flocks. It's not just two men who have been discredited, but an entire Weltanschauung and political movement. Until we recognize this, and reject the agendas of the movement, we are in trouble.
I think Cruz_cntrl has a good point, anyone who tried to buck the elite's control over the U.S. would be promptly assasinated. It is sad, but that is my feeling too, the plutocracy will just not allow someone who is going to rock the boat too much. Think about someone who brings in Universal Medicare, someone who brings in policies that tax corporations more, and other policies that make for a healthy change, brings in laws that would restrict the power and influence of corporations, that person would not live for very long, in my opinion.
Is it just me or are we now living right in the middle of Sinclair Lewis' 1930s era novel "It Can't Happen Here"?
We are living under the boot of Lewis' corpo fascist state in which corporations are the government.
Who is dreaming the common dream of necesary action to end this nightmare? Forget Cindy Sheehan, The Nation, AlterNet, Norm Solomon and all the corpo fascist Demo-publican book lickers.
"Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or ill it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes the law breaker, it breeds contempt for laws; it invites every man to become a law unto himself."
Justice Louis Brandeis (quoted by Gore Vidal in Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace)
I have to laugh when I read Daniel David and others insisting that the election of democrats will save us. Do you really think that where we have ended up as a nation has happened all because of the evil mr bush? Are you really so blind?
This crap started long, long ago. And while bushco is certainly the current and most obvious face of this fascist government, his is not the only face. And his party is not the only party at fault. The dems have been playing the same game, with the same rules and the same faces for decades.
Do you think that electing Hillary will change things? That she will give up the powers that bushco has secured for the presidency?
Let's elect gary gilmore because he's not quite as evil as jeffry dahmer.
PLEASE. Please stop insulting our intelligence.
Electing the lesser of two evils only ensures that you have evil. In fact, given the state of our last two elections it's hard to believe that there is anyone left who honestly believes that their vote will count.....or be counted.
No, the only interesting thing about this election will be seeing how bushco will alter/steal/invalidate etc the results to ensure that he and/or his cronies stay in power. And if you don't think Hillary or Barack are his cronies you haven't been paying attention. Think about this....why, over a year before the elections, are the media so desperate to have us believe that hillary/barack are the only candidates? Why do they refuse airtime to other candidates? Could it be because they understand that no matter who the people vote for, the choice has already been made and it WILL BE one of bushco's two democratic butt buddies? Probably.
Yes, we should vote for democrats becuase cutting our own throats is so much nicer than having someone else do it for us. In the end, who we vote for is irrelevent. We will get whomever the fascists want us to have and be glad of it. Otherwise, we would have to assume responsibilty for what we have allowed this country to become and isn't it so much easier when we have some "other" to blame for our woes?
The people of this country have watched without a peep as the president and his cronies gang-raped lady liberty and wiped their dicks with the constitution. Democrats held her down and the american people watched in fascinated horror, knowing they should stop it, but too scared to do so. Now, as she lies draped across our shore bleeding and dying, we lamely cry "Is there a doctor in the house?"
Now suppose for a second that it was your mother/daughter/sister. Do you excuse those who held her down? Those who silently watched?
Evil is evil is evil and it doesn't matter what mask it wears, it is still evil. You can glaze a spam, dot it with cloves and serve it on a beautiful platter. The damn thing will never be a ham. Hillary can paint herself as a person of peace, she can dress up in doves clothing, but she will ever be a hawk. Ditto for Obama.
Don't buy into the lesser of two evils arguement. Just because they are lesser, they are still evil.
Dear Ralph Nader:
How about starting a public prosecution of the case?
Why don't You, open a public legal hearing and start showing the public flow charts and data that would be clear to any jury across the country.
Why don't you start showing the individual and collective victims?
Show the pathways of the crimes?
I can't help wondering what some of the posters here are hoping for: civil war? a new French Revolution? anarchy? A lot of small changes for the better have happened in my lifetime. Our best hope is a slow pragmatic effort against the worst aspects of capilatism. Impatience is not a virtue. Ploddingly boring mini-steps is my hope.
While blowing away "terrorists" with guns and missles clears the way for investment and other forms of exploitation overseas, rioting at home or civil disobedience isn't a helpful extension of the political process: too much money to be made jailing, marginalizing and ciminalizing "anti-social" attempts to fight back at suffocating power. Lawsuits from a groundswell of motivated slaves is a bulletless way to fight back against authority, but they're indifferent, happy and thankful enough to be able to work and survive, ideal citizens for any government: dutiful, God-fearing, indifferent, ignorant, patriotic and medicated. Really, it's not so bad. Winston felt this optimism, this love and this freedom.
Again, the internet, as so many naively assume, is some sort of equalizer in the exchange of information. It's also a weapon used to prevent you from organizing, to stiffle class action, to divert attention and to keep information away. The most important thing is that you, as a citizen, are not given power and access, that's a dangerous threat to stability and only a few are allowed to make decisions.
If the Dems don't impeach Bush, they'll never impeach anyone. And, if the Dems don't impeach Bush, they might as well just dump that part of the constitution, since it will become a worthless relic, which any impeached president will just ignore. As a matter-of-fact, even if the Dems go ahead impeach and convict Bush and Cheney, Cheney's office will simple write a statement saying, like the Good Witch dismissing the Bad Witch in The Wizard Of Oz, "Be gone, you have no power here."
Conservatives are the cause. They breed and thrive in chaos, so they foment it.
RichM, You make such a true and eloquent case for why particpation in this broken system is pointless that I know not what we can do except turn away and try to create small enclaves of sanity and co-creative inter-relatedness, or start formenting the revolution. Hell, good luck with that. People calling for an action like a day of non-participation seems to fall on deaf ears. I fear that even more of us will have to be hurting a helluva lot more before anything meaningful will happen, and it's hard not to feel that by then it will be worse than a "brave new world".
GregR---not sure of your age...I am 61 and I have seen a steady decline, not the small masured progress you see. Could you give an example? I know impatience is counter-productive, but we are slipping dangerously close to fascism in this supposed "land of liberty" and please don't think that it couldn't possibly happen here. That is just more US exceptionalism being expressed. No one is exempt from those movements and the warning signs are blinking red everywhere I look.
I just read the Declaration of Independence in detail (forgive me, I'm Canadian so I'd never really read it in a great deal of detail)and its instructive to read what the Founding Fathers say in terms of the abuses of power carried out by the King and comparing them to what BushCo is up to right now. There are some striking similarities. The fact that the American democratic experiment is seemingly coming full circle is rather terrifying. It does not instill me with confidence. A fascist America would most certainly invade Canada.
A good clue that "the rule of law" is under attack from the influence of big business is the very prevalence, under this administration, of the phrase "rule of law."
In advertising, a good clue that the product does not "taste like homemade" or "give you the glossy finish of a professional wax job" is when that's how it's labeled . . .
trying to remember when was the last time the us was ruled by law and not by men. . . can't.
We need for people like Nader to write more articles about HOW to challenge and reverse the ever expanding power of corporations and the executive branch. Most people who read articles at a site like Common Dreams don't need to be told that the law has been taken over by corporations. They need to be given more hope about reversing the trend and more tools to reverse it. Nader has helped create such tools before. We are in need of more because we are mired in despair.
We need the kind of hope that a piece of moss would have, if it could think, that it would eventually help break down a boulder or even a mountain, with the help of time and other pieces of moss.
Rich M and starofthesea-I'm 59 and in the middle of corn harvest so don't have too much time to respond. I agree we're closer to fascism now than we have been since the 1930s. I don't know if we're better or worse than then. Rich M-in your post directed at me, I can't argue with any of your points. I realize things seem dire in many respects, but I'm hopeful that many of the insane excesses of Bush/Cheney will in time be viewed as somewhat of an aberration. I have been truly stunned by the unwillingness of the media to reign in the neocons in any meaningful way. Again, I'm hopeful (too hopeful?) that a lesson is being learned and we will turn the corner to a better political/media situation. Mr. Average American seems way too apathetic, but grumblings are growing. Sadly, dead Iraqis (or Iranians) don't seem likely to cause enough stir to make a diffrence, but housing, the plummeting dollar, and the squandering of America's wealth should ultimately cause enough stir to move back towards the progressive values that have been recently forgotten. Viewed from one century in our past, things have progressed in many ways: women's and minority's rights, communications and networking, there are dozens of wind turbines within 20 miles of my farm, technology is moving ahead even without Washington. Orwellian nightmares seem to have become the norm, and yet I refuse to believe that nothing will get better with the next election. Everything will happen too slowly for everyone on this website, including me. Here's one tidbit to mull: we tried to get rid of Chavez with a coup that failed. In the good old days of Kissinger, we probably wouldn't have failed. We used to create havoc quietly in the background. Now that is much more difficult.
NorthATheBorder Oct, 11:49 pm
"I just read the Declaration of Independence in detail (forgive me, I'm Canadian so I'd never really read it in a great deal of detail)and it's instructive to read what the Founding Fathers say in terms of the abuses of power carried out by the King and comparing them to what BushCo is up to right now."
You're probably not aware either, North, that the Smothers Brothers were prevented from reading the Declaration of Independence on their TV show at the height of the Vietnam War. In fact, I believe, their contract was cancelled as a result of their obstinence (although there's no mention of this on Wikipedia.) Anyone have a better recollection of this than I've provided?
Mr. Nader, being a lawyer, are you aware of communitarian law, or communitarianism - the socio-political and economic philosophy from which it springs?
From my current understanding, it's what will destroy all our constitutional safeguards of personal freedom we have left in America... eventually enslaving us all.
A former self-styled progressive democrat, I've had to rethink my positions about the world entirely. My studies of elitist communitarian laws have proven to me that our corporatist government has been, and is, rapidly moving in this direction.
Today, I consider that I'm a republican and a constitutionalist - independent of any political party.
In my re-reading of the early documents created at the time of our nation's founding... no mention of democracy is evidenced. Therefore, any semblance of democratic ideals I once held has gradually disappeared.
For proof, one needs only to look at the crooked outcomes of the last two presidential elections.
I have concentrated on study of various interpretations of (1) the Hegelian dialectic, (2) property and privacy laws, and (3) justice under natural and universal laws to advance my thinking further.
It's why I voluntarily work for the presidential election of libertarian anti-war candidate, Ron Paul. In my view he's the only catalyst for any real change of direction we have before us... and I'm sick-and-tired of whining about our myriad travails - I want to see a reversal of policies... taking us all down the path towards one-world totalitarianism... and modern slavery.
Living in a one-world totalitarian society will not eliminate the class structure crony corporate capitalism has engendered; it will serve only to preserve, sustain and institutionalize it... but our liberty to think and do as we please... under a just set of laws... will no longer exist.
And we, the people, will get to live out our days in a sci-fi styled police state - our happiness... and probably our poisoned planet too... be damned!
Legal changes are indeed the order of the day if we want to preserve our civil liberties, Mr. Nader. As I see it, only Dr. Paul, a serious and long-time student of economics and foreign policy, calls for eliminating corporatism... abolishing the 16th Amendment... and the top-tier candidates from both major parties... apparently will only perpetuate the status quo.
Though I'm no religionist, Paul professes to be a Christian, so presumably - like most of our elitist founders - he believes as I do in the Golden Rule.
Under succeeding Democratic or Republican government administrations that I've known in my lifetime, money and men ruled via corruption, always subverting the law.
As a hero of mine, it would be nice if you cared to comment. No offense is intended... but I do find it a bit disconcerting that so few writers at Common Dreams ever bother to post comments... and join in the discussion threads... their fine articles inspire.