I honestly cannot tell you when the last time I sat down to watch the evening news. All of the mainstream media channels make my head spin, and don't even get me started on daytime world, economic and fiscal news. I just can't do it.
However, thanks to the internet, I can stay in the loop and keep my lunch down. I get daily updates from the Minneapolis Star Tribune in my email, which keeps me on top of whats going on locally. Aside from the numerous Libertarian, End the Fed, Young Americans for Liberty, Campaign for Liberty etc. emails, I developed a twitter account that follows all the #tlot s (thats Top Libertarians on Twitter, for those of you who don't use it).
Through Twitter and the sporadic emails from various liberty-minded groups, I have been able to come across others who want the kind of change I do in the system, and people who actually are out there, making it happen.
These are the people you should really keep an eye out for (in no particular order):
1. Dr. Rand Paul
No, I didn't type that wrong. Dr. Rand Paul, son of Congressman Dr. Ron Paul (who you might have heard of), has been the chairman of the Kentucky Taxpayers United, a group that monitors and rates the State Legislature.
According to an event on Facebook, Dr. Paul has been traveling the state of Kentucky for the past several months meeting, talking, and gauging his support. He will be making a major announcement tonight on Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC. I can only hope, pray and speculate that he will be announcing his much-rumored 2010 run for Senate.
Check out his website, http://www.rand2010.com for updates, further information, and to let him know you have his support!
2. Peter Schiff
Schiff is an economic commentator and author of Crash Proof: How to Profit From the Coming Economic Collapse, which was published in 2007. (Yes, that's right, this guy predicted our current economic crisis early enough to have written a book about it. If you know anything about the publishing process, you'll be impressed.)
He has appeared on a variety of financial news programs, including CNBC, CNN, CNN International, and Fox News. Schiff was also an economic advisor for Dr. Ron Paul's campaign in the Republican primaries last year.
According to http://www.schiff2010.com, Schiff is considering a Senate run as well, but like Dr. Paul, is still testing out the waters. This guy knows really knows his stuff! There's even a link on his candidacy website to his solutions. With actual solutions. And plans.
3. Jason Talley & Pete Eyre
Together, this duo makes up the foundation of The Motorhome Diaries. (Yes, that is a clever play on Che Guevara and The Motorcycle Diaries. Which was actually a good movie if you can get past the whole Communist Manifesto undertone.)
These guys are going across the country (and stopping in Canada and Mexico) and spreading the word about freedom, as well as getting the views of the public. They are meeting up "with individuals and groups from diverse backgrounds and viewpoints at college campuses, homes, businesses and organizations that are united by one thing: increasing individual freedom and responsibility and decreasing the scope of government."
The best part? They bought a used, 30 foot motorhome. Named M.A.R.V. (which stands for Mobile Authority Response Vehicle).
Check out their website to see their itinerary and interviews with some of your favorite liberty-minded people, including Dr. Ron Paul and David Nolan, the founder of our dear Libertarian Party.
UPDATE: I was just informed that these three have been arrested. For more details check out this link.
4. Nancy Pelosi
Just kidding.
So, next time you are trying to eat a cheese burger and watch your Fox News or MSNBC and being spoon fed whichever bias you choose, just remember that there still is an opportunity to make a change in the government- the legal way.
Whether its through the national Senate, like Dr. Rand Paul and Peter Schiff, on the grassroots level like Jason and Pete of The Motorhome Diaries, or on the state, county or local level, keep an eye out for upcoming freedom lovers in the news and in your community.
In liberty,
Jackie
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Majority Rule & Freedom
Usually, when it comes to the fundamental values of the United States, people mention freedom and democracy. Our society and government recognizes such rights as freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, and every so often, we vote on popular referenda and elect people to represent us in Congress, putting the abstract concept of democracy into practice. But, while democracy and liberty generally go hand in hand, can they conflict each other? Can democracy take away some of our liberties, and can too much freedom undermine the democratic process?
The first example that comes to my mind is California Proposition 8, more commonly known as Prop' 8. For those who live under a rock and those who just haven't heard of the aforementioned, the proposition involved a popular vote in the state of California to decide whether or not to outlaw same-sex marriage in the state constitution. Now I don't believe government should have anything to do in the tradition of marriage, but considering it already is involved, I personally think that it should recognize all unions, both heterosexual and homosexual. On November 4th, 2008, it was announced that 52.24% had voted in favor of the proposition, supporting the banning of homosexual marriage in the State of California. The majority had voted for the suppression of more than two million people's rights (more than five percent of the population). In this fashion, the democratic process had undermined the liberty of a minority.
Of course sometimes the policies in place for several decades bring some inertia into the equation, and the democratic process fails to bring more freedom to a people. I'm thinking, for example, about the legalization, taxation, and regulation of cannabis in the state of California. The California Assembly Bill 390 was introduced in early 2009, and would change the policies of the state of California in order to regulate marijuana like alcohol, rather than like heroin. While 56 % of Californians have stated they favored the legalization and taxation of the substance in a recent poll, the policies in place don't reflect this popular decision, and probably won't for a couple of years. But the novelty of this majority is part of the issue, for it contrasts with seven decades of prohibition, and representative democracies such as the United States tend to cause a delay between changes in public opinion and changes in policy.
On the other side, too much freedom may also undermine, or should I say distort, the democratic process. Again, I will use the example of California Proposition 8. In this campaign, as in any campaign in today's United States, significant amounts of money were used by interests groups to support one side or the other. Churches and other organizations took part in the campaign to support the banning of homosexual unions, spending a total of forty thousand dollars to alter public opinion. On another, much more global scale, the mainstream media of the nation did not hesitate to attempt at persuading for or against the proposition, using the great influence they have on the population to change the outcome according to their view. Those campaigns play with the population's faith in the media to make the popular vote shift in a direction or another, and often, money becomes a crucial campaigning tool. Often, the power of ideas is replaced by the power of money, and many votes can be altered through a well financed campaigning effort. In this fashion, complete lack of regulation can lead to a manipulation of democracy.
As an international student, I can't help but compare the attitude of the U.S. media with that of other nations. In several European countries, such as France, there is a legal limit to the amount of money that can be spent on a political campaign. I'm not a big fan of government intervention in the media, but if properly set, that limit can enable the population to remain informed about the arguments of diverse positions without having to be flooded by political propaganda. In many ways, this limit enables the public to be educated without being manipulated. The U.S. can learn from policies in place in other nations, and while exporting freedom to other nation-states may not always be a good idea, importing a more democratic or a more free approach to an issue can bring out great outcomes.
Finding a balance between the people's voice in policy making and the extent to which government should not intervene is a complex and continuous problem, which involves myriads of factors and policies, and which is an essential part of sculpting a free democracy, and democratic freedom. In an era marked by the instantaneous sharing of ideas across borders and oceans, America is not an island, and using the templates of other successful nations may be the key to reaching the free society that every American deserves.
The first example that comes to my mind is California Proposition 8, more commonly known as Prop' 8. For those who live under a rock and those who just haven't heard of the aforementioned, the proposition involved a popular vote in the state of California to decide whether or not to outlaw same-sex marriage in the state constitution. Now I don't believe government should have anything to do in the tradition of marriage, but considering it already is involved, I personally think that it should recognize all unions, both heterosexual and homosexual. On November 4th, 2008, it was announced that 52.24% had voted in favor of the proposition, supporting the banning of homosexual marriage in the State of California. The majority had voted for the suppression of more than two million people's rights (more than five percent of the population). In this fashion, the democratic process had undermined the liberty of a minority.
Of course sometimes the policies in place for several decades bring some inertia into the equation, and the democratic process fails to bring more freedom to a people. I'm thinking, for example, about the legalization, taxation, and regulation of cannabis in the state of California. The California Assembly Bill 390 was introduced in early 2009, and would change the policies of the state of California in order to regulate marijuana like alcohol, rather than like heroin. While 56 % of Californians have stated they favored the legalization and taxation of the substance in a recent poll, the policies in place don't reflect this popular decision, and probably won't for a couple of years. But the novelty of this majority is part of the issue, for it contrasts with seven decades of prohibition, and representative democracies such as the United States tend to cause a delay between changes in public opinion and changes in policy.
On the other side, too much freedom may also undermine, or should I say distort, the democratic process. Again, I will use the example of California Proposition 8. In this campaign, as in any campaign in today's United States, significant amounts of money were used by interests groups to support one side or the other. Churches and other organizations took part in the campaign to support the banning of homosexual unions, spending a total of forty thousand dollars to alter public opinion. On another, much more global scale, the mainstream media of the nation did not hesitate to attempt at persuading for or against the proposition, using the great influence they have on the population to change the outcome according to their view. Those campaigns play with the population's faith in the media to make the popular vote shift in a direction or another, and often, money becomes a crucial campaigning tool. Often, the power of ideas is replaced by the power of money, and many votes can be altered through a well financed campaigning effort. In this fashion, complete lack of regulation can lead to a manipulation of democracy.
As an international student, I can't help but compare the attitude of the U.S. media with that of other nations. In several European countries, such as France, there is a legal limit to the amount of money that can be spent on a political campaign. I'm not a big fan of government intervention in the media, but if properly set, that limit can enable the population to remain informed about the arguments of diverse positions without having to be flooded by political propaganda. In many ways, this limit enables the public to be educated without being manipulated. The U.S. can learn from policies in place in other nations, and while exporting freedom to other nation-states may not always be a good idea, importing a more democratic or a more free approach to an issue can bring out great outcomes.
Finding a balance between the people's voice in policy making and the extent to which government should not intervene is a complex and continuous problem, which involves myriads of factors and policies, and which is an essential part of sculpting a free democracy, and democratic freedom. In an era marked by the instantaneous sharing of ideas across borders and oceans, America is not an island, and using the templates of other successful nations may be the key to reaching the free society that every American deserves.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)