|
Replies: 16
| visibility 844
|
Oculus Spirit [97663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64803
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Do people even history anymore?
Nov 7, 2018, 8:51 AM
|
|
https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/415441-americas-urban-rural-divide-deepens
The urban/rural divide was our ORIGINAL political divide in the United States. It's the oldest, most consistent, longest standing divide we have. It's always existed. It shaped our Constitution entirely. The bulk of the Constitution was drafted by Federalists with urban interests in mind. It was designed to keep the federal government from eating itself. The Bill of Rights was designed to garner the support of the rural Democratic Republicans. That was designed to keep the federal government from eating the states and the people. The dynamics have changed little. Issues come and go, as do parties, but the demographics have changed very little. Same general issues. Same lopsided maps for elections, even though they didn't have them back then. TONS of red, spots of Blue, and fairly balanced populations in both. Urban areas were federalists. They consisted of merchants, traders, bankers, and other urban professions. Rural areas were red, they consisted of farmers mostly. Urban centers had a smaller population back then, but they had the money and power condensed there. Rural areas had a larger overall population, but less money proportional to the population. And less power as well. Today the numbers tip in favor of urban areas. Urban people still overall have more money as well. The main reason we were created as a republic, why the electoral college was formed, why we have two houses on Congress, was to keep large swaths of America from being subservient to urban interests where money and power flowed. The fear back then was having the entire nation subservient to New York. Today it's New York and California. Same thing really.
But people definitely media today, and blog, and breath from their mouths, and don't read books, and have attention spans shorter than goldfish. And memory capacity is similar. So this is now some new crisis. A new divide. We've never been this polarized. Blahblah. We've always been this divided, and polarized, and in much the same way demographically, socially, and economically. The difference is we're not functioning as a republic anymore. Difference is we have a 14th and 16th Amendment since then that's lead us down the wrong path. We're getting what James Madison feared in the Federalists Papers from a two party system. We were made a Republic specifically to deal with faction. And faction existed then, and it exists now. Along very similar lines really.
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Guru [1134]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1328
Joined: 5/5/04
|
Re: Do people even history anymore?
Nov 7, 2018, 9:14 AM
|
|
thanks for that history lesson.. but, what's wrong w/ the 14th amendment? how has it lead us down a wrong path?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: Do people even history anymore?
Nov 7, 2018, 9:20 AM
|
|
Many don't like the fact that the 14th gives incentive for illegal aliens to sneak into the US to have babies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Many don't believe it does.
Nov 7, 2018, 9:24 AM
|
|
Imo, the 14th is as good as any of the other amendments. I just believe the problem with illegal immigration is a relatively new problem which has yet to be addressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64803
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Or the federal governmen thte ability to apply all laws to
Nov 7, 2018, 9:36 AM
[ in reply to Re: Do people even history anymore? ] |
|
all states, basically at will. It was designed to make sure freed slaves were citizens and to make sure slaves were treated equally (didn't stop Jim Crow). It's been misused to give women the right to an abortion, and gay people the right to marry, and has taken many issues from the states and mandated equal application. When you do that, you tick off people. Defeats the purpose and function of the 10th Amendment as well.
Now when you add the federal income tax, which didn't exist until around 1916 or so, then you give the federal government the right (it previously was purposefully never given) to tax incomes. NOW you have the carrot on that stick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Not only does the division continue to exist but...
Nov 7, 2018, 9:21 AM
|
|
the left sees it as a selling point for unity and treats it as if it's something that isn't healthy for the country.
If asked why the parties seem to be further apart I'd say it's the right's desire to do everything to oppose Obama and the left's desire to oppose everything Trump. That, imo, is what gives the loudest voices control over the rhetoric coming from the dems' party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [38514]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47162
Joined: 10/28/02
|
The current division is not healthy for our country.
Nov 7, 2018, 9:24 AM
|
|
Because it's identity based and not issue based. And the answer to division appears to be more division.
To me this illustrates what is wrong with our country:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEczkhfLwqM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [22935]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16892
Joined: 12/2/00
|
I never understand the party line division voting
Nov 7, 2018, 4:00 PM
|
|
Every single politician had 30-49% of the population vote against them. However, they are still part of the electorate. Why try to actively and consistently #### off almost half of your population?
Sheesh, throw the other guys a bone here and there. Don't support abortions? Well increase funding a bit for healthcare and lower income folks that ultimately will have these children. Not expecting them to be 50/50, but try to think of 70/30 or 80/20 policies.
Especially for those of us that are middle of the road and get stuck with politicians that vote in the extreme. I can't stand politicians on either side that don't bend.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6101]
TigerPulse: 85%
Posts: 10117
Joined: 11/1/11
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93607]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95384
Joined: 12/25/09
|
One of the fallacies taken as fact by both parties is...
Nov 7, 2018, 9:40 AM
|
|
that Mexicans will vote for dems. At the moment that may hold true but nearly half the legal immigrants in this country think a border wall is needed.
If the dems ever decide to give illegals a path to citizenship they will soon learn that people who can't speak the language aren't dumb as dumb as they seem. They work for a living instead of sitting in some office and living in gated communities. They understand personal economics as well as anyone.
Imo, if Trump can bait the dems into settling this immigration dispute and providing a path to citizenship pubs will have become the leaders of a minority group who will vote in every election.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Re: One of the fallacies taken as fact by both parties is...
Nov 7, 2018, 9:45 AM
|
|
Repubs will likely never get the majority of the minority vote.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3389]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3043
Joined: 10/22/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standout [321]
TigerPulse: 48%
Posts: 853
Joined: 1/8/09
|
Re: Not only does the division continue to exist but...
Nov 7, 2018, 9:49 AM
[ in reply to Re: Not only does the division continue to exist but... ] |
|
How do we unify with with people that break our laws with impunity and don't even speak English?
Are you speaking about TheRump: "breaks our laws and doesn't speak our language."
You are correct on both counts! Good call!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64803
Joined: 7/13/02
|
We don't unify. We've never been unified. We have
Nov 7, 2018, 9:51 AM
[ in reply to Re: Not only does the division continue to exist but... ] |
|
in the past, been able to properly and amicably manage our divisions. But we've never been unified. That's a farce. See, as a republic, SC can do what it wants to do and CA can do what they want to. But when Washington sides with CA, or SC, and forces a law or regulation equally on all 50 states, that will pi$$ off a lot of people. Gay marriage and abortion are all issues that should be state issues. If left to the 50 states as the 10th Amendment requires, and the 14th effectively through interpretation nullifies, you would have maybe 20-25 states outlawing abortion and 25-30 that allow it. In that scenario, you will have FAR more people content than applying one universal standard or the other to all the states. If you're mad about it, you can always move to another state. If you're mad about it and the federal government mandates it, you're #### out of luck.
And people always point to the civil war and slavery, which was a state issue right up to the civil war. The problem with the Civil War was we were still adding states at the time. So the fights moved from new state to new state as to whether they were free, or slave. Without new states being added, the issue would have been legislated. Slavery would have ended anyway. The writing was already on the wall, war or not. The issue was the federal government outlawing a majority of the economies of the southern states. Imagine cars being outlawed. Only public transportation can be used. Nationwide. It was that big a deal in the southern states. And in the name of the environment, that's today entirely in the realm of power of the federal government. Let states decide about cars and you get a choice. Everyone's happy. Division is still there but everyone has an option to move and be happy.
And as for immigration, that's the result of a oligarch-like Congress punting their duties to the executive branch in order to not have to take a stand and risk loosing reelection. So immigration law is solely laid at the feet of the President. The President has the option to enforce, or not enforce, the laws passed previously by Congress as they see fit. THAT'S BAD. That's an example of an internal breakdown in our system of checks and balances. It sets a very bad precedent. What if the next president doesn't like the current capital gains taxes. What's to stop the president from instructing the IRS not to enforce collection of capital gains taxes? He can instruct the INS not to enforce certain immigration laws. Why not taxes? Or environmental laws? You name it. BAD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [9646]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11399
Joined: 9/10/99
|
I've always been amazed the our forefathers had the
Nov 7, 2018, 9:49 AM
|
|
foresight to establish the Electoral College...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97663]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64803
Joined: 7/13/02
|
If you look at what they had to draw on
Nov 7, 2018, 10:16 AM
|
|
Their history predates ours. Want to understand them, you have to read what they read. Know what they knew. Ignore what you know since their time. Then things make sense.
Philosophically, our nation's creation was the culmination of The Enlightenment. Study The Enlightenment, and the history leading up to the Enlightenment, and you'll know what was in the heads of our founding fathers. For their time, they were creating a revolutionary experiment in governance that had never been set to paper previously. It was the biggest experiment in governance set to paper since the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta served as a bookend marking the end of feudalism, and the medieval period. It set in motion the Renaissance and later the Enlightenment. It facilitated the successful execution of monarchies as viable forms of governance. Our Constitution likewise serves as a bookend marking the end of the Enlightenment, and the whole notion of monarchy as the best form of government.
And then you look at how we flourished while France burned when both nations had revolutions and threw off monarchs. Then you look at all the nations since who have imitated our Constitution to various levels, and failed. The rule that has evolved is that democracies always fail when they govern a large and diverse population. They thrive when the governed are like-minded, and socially homogeneous. So what makes us unique? Two things. First is our system of checks and balances. These were put in place in the main text of the Constitution by mostly Federalists, and some democratic republicans. That kept our federal government from becoming a democracy or a dictatorship. Power was equally divided. This aspect is often replicated in other nations, and still many have failed. The second thing that made us unique, the most important and most overlooked distinction, was what was set forth in the Bill of Rights. And of that Bill of Rights, the last Amendment was the most important. Without it, our Constitution would never have been ratified. That's the 10th Amendment, which placed a broad limit on our federal government and it's powers were to be strictly limited to what had been set forth in the Constitution. Everything else, every other power not specifically granted in the Constitution, was to be left to the states. THIS made us a republic. And that's what made/makes us unique.
The electoral college placed urban and rural interests on even ground. It was a system of checks and balances on our elections. It was designed to prevent New York, in particular, from running the federal government. The electoral college, along with the Senate, both serve to give power to states, and not simply population centers. Dispersing the power of the vote evenly, and keeping population centers from having all the control, kept us intact.
Those who wish to characterize the Constitution as a living, breathing document, and our founding fathers as a bunch of ignorant, rich, old, white, racists, slave owners, do so at their own peril. What they did was nothing short of amazing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13076
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Don't forget...the 17th Amendment is a disaster.
Nov 7, 2018, 7:39 PM
|
|
Speaking of history. Those who consider themselves "progressives" don't have a clue what it means or where it comes from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 16
| visibility 844
|
|
|
50
