"American" Principles

[babe]

all right. Here's a space for clarity. What do you believe are the core principles we love as "America"......

Pretty sure there's at least two clusters of inconsistent notions we love as "America"....... well, OK.... let's include "World We Want".

Here's my starting point:

Right of Conscience, covering freedom of speech, freedom of writing/publishing/painting/creating/art.

Right to Act/Right of Action: freedom of peaceable assembly, local government, property rights.

Equal Human Rights: equal protection under the law, equal opportunity in commerce or markets, right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness or stuff we need or want.

"America" was unique as a high-standard design meant to limit government power. Of course, in some respects we may need government to be powerful and effective...... maintaining peace and human rights among those essentials. But to limit anyone, a person or a group, from imposing an unjust system on the rest of us. That is the kind of limit we want in government.

My purpose here will be to discuss various notions in terms of maximizing personal liberties and perogatives including macro issues like clean air and water and environment..... and ensuring a kind of "federalism" that brings decisions and power closer to the people affected and restricting centralized control from a few persons.

 

[str8line]

all right. Here's a space for clarity. What do you believe are the core principles we love as "America"......

Pretty sure there's at least two clusters of inconsistent notions we love as "America"....... well, OK.... let's include "World We Want".

Here's my starting point:

Right of Conscience, covering freedom of speech, freedom of writing/publishing/painting/creating/art.

Right to Act/Right of Action: freedom of peaceable assembly, local government, property rights.

Equal Human Rights: equal protection under the law, equal opportunity in commerce or markets, right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness or stuff we need or want.

"America" was unique as a high-standard design meant to limit government power. Of course, in some respects we may need government to be powerful and effective...... maintaining peace and human rights among those essentials. But to limit anyone, a person or a group, from imposing an unjust system on the rest of us. That is the kind of limit we want in government.

My purpose here will be to discuss various notions in terms of maximizing personal liberties and perogatives including macro issues like clean air and water and environment..... and ensuring a kind of "federalism" that brings decisions and power closer to the people affected and restricting centralized control from a few persons.

The core principle is to prevent people like Trump or the wealthy or the religious from taking over and imposing their wack **** upon us.

 

[Stars Fan]

Interesting thread, thanks for starting it.
The obvious American principle is liberty, as in the statue of liberty. That might be too broad for your (OP) intent here. But I want focus on it to contrast it with another aspirational principle, responsibility.
There is a foundation that wants to build a corresponding statue of responsibility on the west coast. The idea was first proposed by one of my favorite authors, and favorite human beings, Viktor Frankl. (You can Google it and get tons of links, but here is one to the foundation. Target date for the construction of said statue is 2023.)
When we talk about principles for our ideal society, I think it is important for not just focus on what the society owes us. We should also discuss what we owe the society, how we build that ideal polity.
Liberty and responsibility seem like good bookends to me.

 

[babe]

The core principle is to prevent people like Trump or the wealthy or the religious from taking over and imposing their wack **** upon us.

I consider political ideology as toxic as religion, and so far I think the case got up on Trump having a self-serving agenda or modus operandi is more imagined than real. Pretty much. he'll do his 4, or 8, and go home. We'll have to find someone else who just isn't riding the Level the Playing Field train that is the free ticket for the rich to run everything.

I don't know what you read, or why, but I bet a lot of people are pretty much like you, even a lot who voted or will vote for Trump. As I see it, most dems who go Trump really are protesting the insider control of the dem party. Same with R's who went for Trump.

And so, most of Trump's support is actually Party Rejection folks.

 

[babe]

Interesting thread, thanks for starting it.
The obvious American principle is liberty, as in the statute of liberty. That might be too broad for your (OP) intent here. But I want focus on it to contrast it with another aspirational principle, responsibility.
There is a foundation that wants to build a corresponding statue of responsibility on the west coast. The idea was first proposed by one of my favorite authors, and favorite human beings, Viktor Frankl. (You can Google it and get tons of links, but here is one to the foundation. Target date for the construction of said statue is 2023.)
When we talk about principles for our ideal society, I think it is important for not just focus on what the society owes us. We should also discuss what we owe the society, how we build that ideal polity.
Liberty and responsibility seem like good bookends to me.

The core difference in American government from the start was the deliberate effort to make government answerable to the people, and resistant to a take-over by any clique or interest or dictator or whatnot.

The biggest threat was the British penchant to reclaim the "empire", and that is what forced the colonies to band together despite serious differences, and federalism was the only way to unite such diverse states for mutual protection.

 

[olden_undercover]

You're a thousand miles wide and at least as many miles deep, babe, so forgive me if this response is a little shy of your intent/thought process!

I'm going to say democracy, if that can be considered a principle. And within that democracy-- as long as we're making wishes-- no super-delegates, no electoral college, and some clear mechanisms under which political parties, special interest groups, and campaign finance cannot functionally operate. I'm talking about elected officials who win strictly by majority vote, and are therefore more directly accountable to the citizenry.

 

[Jazzta]

You're a thousand miles wide and at least as many miles deep, babe, so forgive me if this response is a little shy of your intent/thought process!

I'm going to say democracy, if that can be considered a principle. And within that democracy-- as long as we're making wishes-- no super-delegates, no electoral college, and some clear mechanisms under which political parties, special interest groups, and campaign finance cannot functionally operate. I'm talking about elected officials who win strictly by majority vote, and are therefore more directly accountable to the citizenry.

That should be the objective.

 

[Stars Fan]

The core difference in American government from the start was the deliberate effort to make government answerable to the people, and resistant to a take-over by any clique or interest or dictator or whatnot.

The biggest thread was the British penchant to reclaim the "empire", and that is what forced the colonies to band together despite serious differences, and federalism was the only way to unite such diverse states for mutual protection.

Agree with you here. The idea that the true power should lie in the people and not the king, or church, or dictator is essential.

I also think that balance should be considered a basic principle. Balance between the key factions or stake holders was built into the American system. Balance between rural and city dwellers, agricultural and business interests, religious and agnostic/atheists, etc. What good would it do to renounce a king, or pope, just to put "mob rule" in its place. If one group or interest dominates then all not in that group suffer.

 

[olden_undercover]

Kinda disappointed this thread didn't take off. Interesting topic. Where you at, @babe ?

 

[babe]

Kinda disappointed this thread didn't take off. Interesting topic. Where you at, @babe ?

I am deep in the woods of other stuff. I know this is the best of all topics. There was one reply above that showed someone willing to be a real scholar at it, but I am just entirely absorbed. Yes I know I have thrown out a lot on the impeachment thread. I drive a lot, and listen to the XM 125 people most of the time, and so that is just the froth on top of my little brain.

American Principles Project.

How can we get this stuff taught in our schools?

 

[babe]

You're a thousand miles wide and at least as many miles deep, babe, so forgive me if this response is a little shy of your intent/thought process!

I'm going to say democracy, if that can be considered a principle. And within that democracy-- as long as we're making wishes-- no super-delegates, no electoral college, and some clear mechanisms under which political parties, special interest groups, and campaign finance cannot functionally operate. I'm talking about elected officials who win strictly by majority vote, and are therefore more directly accountable to the citizenry.

We have a Supreme Court that considers corporations to be real, significant "citizens" with the right to donate, to lobby, to buy what they need from government, "citizens" with no vote per se, but the right to own our political process. Some years ago, there was a fairly impressive scholar working for The New American, whose articles I especially appreciated. He sorta went off the deep end, though, with a perfectly legitimate article. When he saw our founders had deliberately stacked the deck against the people, by giving government the power of eminent domain. He lost all hope, and moved to a little town in Idaho under the west slopes of the Tetons, never to write again.

He was a black man, and it was about the same time as some New England real estate seizures by government "eminent domain" under the rationalization that the guvmint had to increase the tax base by promoting developments. So little old ladies had to "sell" out on a fairly poor price.

I will probably always be a thousand miles off the target anyone else sees, and deeper than anyone wants to dive as well...... but let's have some good times.

 

[Joncolton]

Truth
Freedom
Justice