Can't America Afford Democracy?
October 20, 2016
How about defending freedom at home?
The enemy ((within)) buys all the politicians for the price of one aircraft carrier.
People who can demonstrate a threshold of support
should be publicly funded equally.
Do you really think politicians don't pocket
"campaign donations"?
by Henry Makow Ph.D.
Today, there is a lot of talk about elections being "fixed."
If Americans really cared about democracy, would they allow private interests
to outbid them for their lawmakers' loyalty?
Would they allow private interests to legally bribe their legislators?
"Campaign donations" are estimated at about $6-7 billion this electoral cycle.
This includes the White House, 34 U.S. Senate seats, 12 governorships
and all 435 U.S. House seats.
This is roughly one percent of the 2016 "defence" budget of $600 billion.
In other words, while the US is ostensibly defending "freedom"around the world, it chooses not to defend it at home
for the cost of one aircraft carrier.
If Americans really cared about democracy, they would demand that "campaign contributions" be banned.
Freedom would be defended by chopping 1% off the "defence" budget to finance elections.
Doug P said (October 23, 2016):
Its the mixing of the public with the private that you describe. USA was a constitutional republic that adopted certain immutable truths. A democracy makes those truths living truths, subject to change. I asked Bob Rae about the huge political donations that made Guardasil vaccinations law by asking the audience (during a speech): Is it law because it is good or because the health minister received millions of dollars? Bob Rae said "That's the way it's done". I don't think he is a bad guy. I Rae days were a good idea and he had others.
You don't wrestle with pigs without getting dirty. The conflict of interest between the banks collecting their phoney debt and the public welfare creates a conflict of interest which in turn attracts only pigs for the trough. One cannot serve God and Mammon at the same time.