Life - Liberty - Property

Disaffected: Dissatisfied with the people in authority and no longer willing to support them.

[disaffectedcitizen]

Carey Wedler — What you're not being told about the conflict with Iran...

Not wanting to waste trillions of dollars and countless human lives on another unwinnable regime-change war doesn't mean I hate freedom. It means I distrust all governments and their high-horse claims to care about humanity while they destroy it.

...Maybe you’re cheering the death of the Iranian general because he was behind the attack on the U.S. embassy. Aside from the fact that his militia was integral in beating back ISIS, there never would have been an attack on the U.S. embassy in Iraq in the first place if they hadn’t been conducting a failed, bloody war there for 17 years, helping create ISIS in the first place.

In fact, considering America’s track record with military intervention, and even if governments did have the right to invade other sovereign nations (they don’t), the U.S. would still be the worst possible option to lead this effort. Iraq. Afganistan. Libya. Yemen. I’m not saying these countries didn’t already have problems of their own, but America’s bombings and invasions have obliterated their homelands and destroyed human life, all without actually achieving the intended goal of stopping terrorism. Terror attacks in Iraq increased after the U.S. invasion. ISIS grew directly because of U.S. failures there, in addition to U.S. allies propping them up. Al-Qaeda grew early on because the U.S. just had to undermine the Soviets in Afghanistan by supporting the Mujahideen. The Taliban still controls the majority of land there after 18 years of war.

You can’t decry the violent aggression of one country when you’re calling for it on behalf of your own. You can’t claim to have the moral high-ground when you rationalize war crimes and empire.

[bonniekristian]

[disaffectedcitizen]

In the free world, we have the luxury of speaking about communism as a philosophy. But wherever the Communists are in power, there is no philosophy. It is cruel dictatorship.

Sabina Wurmbrand, imprisoned for her faith by Romanian Communists, in a message delivered in the Shetland Islands, 1980

[disaffectedcitizen]

The Bee Explains: Democratic Socialism

You can’t go into a Whole Foods or indie record store without hearing somebody talk about it: democratic socialism. Is it a radical new idea that we should try out in our nation, or is it an old idea with the word “democratic” stapled to the front to make it sound more palatable? Find out …

How would the government pay for all of that?

By rightfully appropriating money from terrible, evil, oppressive, hardworking, enterprising citizens who have earned wealth via the dreaded free market economy that has led to unprecedented human flourishing. Governments are known for being the most efficient spenders of money, and so surely would do an excellent job as stewards of your wealth—err, we mean, the public’s wealth.

[disaffectedcitizen]

CNNMoney — Is the US trade deficit a bad thing?

A nation has a “deficit” if it imports more than it exports...

But a trade deficit isn’t inherently good or bad. Sometimes, it’s even a symptom of a strong economy.

This imaginary problem is what Trump is starting a trade war over. He has announced 25% tariffs on $50 billion worth of imports from China.

You don’t help the economy by hampering free trade.

[disaffectedcitizen]

[HT: YAL]

[disaffectedcitizen]

The Trump administration’s separation of families at the border, explained

Why children are being sent to "foster care or whatever" while their parents are sent to jail.

As a matter of policy, the US government is separating families who seek asylum in the US by crossing the border illegally.

Dozens of parents are being split from their children each day — the children labeled “unaccompanied minors” and sent to government custody or foster care, the parents labeled criminals and sent to jail.

Between October 1, 2017 and May 31, 2018, at least 2,700 children have been split from their parents. 1,995 of them were separated over the last six weeks of that window — April 18 to May 31 — indicating that at present, an average of 45 children are being taken from their parents each day.

[disaffectedcitizen]

Notes: Federalist Paper #50

Title: Periodic Appeals to the People Considered Author: Publius (James Madison) Date: February 5, 1788

Volume: 2 - The Proposed Constitution General topic: The structure of the new government Specific topic: The complications of political parties

Big Idea:

The hardest thing about holding the government accountable is working around political parties within the government.

Favorite Lines:

“…Keeping the several departments of power within their due bounds without particularly conferring them as provisions for altering the Constitution itself.”

“When men exercise their reason coolly and freely on a variety of distinct questions, they inevitably fall into different opinions on some of them. When they are governed by a common passion, their opinions, if they are so to be called, will be the same.”

“An extinction of parties necessarily implies either a universal alarm for the public safety, or an absolute extinction of liberty.”

Paraphrased Outline:

Instead of bringing concerns about government overreach to the people randomly, the people should be given input on a regular basis.

These appeals should keep the branches of government within their roles more than to amend the Constitution. 

If these appeals are spread out too much, they will lose their effectiveness in holding our officials accountable. 

In 1783, a council in Pennsylvania investigated whether its state government had overstepped its powers.

But it has some problems: 

One was that the council members were already politically aligned before the investigation.

A second was that these council members had also been members of the government under investigation—creating a conflict of interest.

A third problem was that these men were led by “passion, not reason.”

A fourth was that these men intentionally misinterpreted the Pennsylvania constitution to meet their needs.

And a fifth problem was that the decisions of the council had no lasting effect on the practices of the Pennsylvania government.

These kinds of problems are caused by political parties—But we can’t get rid of political parties without also getting rid of liberty.

Personal Thoughts:

This was a really short entry—almost too short. I’m not exactly sure what point Madison wanted to make.

[Full Text]

[disaffectedcitizen]

World War II | Memorial Day Tribute — Storytellers  

[micdotcom]

Potent minimalist art sends a strong message about police and vigilante brutality in America

Journalist and artist Shirin Barghi has created a gripping, thought-provoking series of graphics that not only examines racial prejudice in today’s America, but also captures the sense of humanity that often gets lost in news coverage. Titled “Last Words,” the graphics illustrate the last recorded words by Brown and other young black people — Trayvon Martin, Oscar Grant and others — who have been killed by police and vigilantes in recent years.

Let us not forget their voices

[bonniekristian]

Laws made in moments of panic don’t go away when the panic subsides.

This week’s column at Rare. An excerpt:

Passing ill-informed laws in the terror, anger and despair we feel after a crisis is a dangerous endeavor. It leads us to embrace quick fixes without adequately thinking through their implications — whom they’d help and whom they’d hurt. It pushes us to disproportionately rely on the proposals of opportunistic politicians and lobbyists, who rush to present themselves as “experts” ready to answer our demand that government do something to prevent future pain. […]

Absent [a] basic commitment to finding and using facts as accurately as we can, any policy approach risks terrible unintended legal consequences that will be very difficult to undo. The PATRIOT Act didn’t end when we realized it’s a huge expansion of the federal surveillance state that isn’t even an effective counter-terrorism measure. The TSA didn’t disappear when we noticed it had turned airport checkpoints into wasteful and invasive security theater.

Laws made in moments of panic don’t go away when the panic subsides, and demanding our laws reflect reality is among our greatest safeguards against legislative regret.

[disaffectedcitizen]

Notes: Federalist Paper #49

Title: Method of Guarding Against the Encroachments of Any One Department of Government Author: Publius (James Madison) Date: February 2, 1788

Volume: 2 - The Proposed Constitution General topic: The structure of the new government Specific topic: Conventions for public judgment of Government branches

Big Idea:

Jefferson’s plan to hold conventions to let the people decide cases of over-reaching government branches is a good one. We just need to watch out for some concerns.

Favorite Lines:

“The people are the only legitimate fountain of power.”

“The reason of man, like man himself, is timid and cautious when left alone, and acquired firmness and confidence in proportion to the number with which it is associated.”

“It is the reason, alone, of the public, that ought to control and regulate the government. The passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government.”

Paraphrased Outline:

In addition to Notes on the State of Virginia, Thomas Jefferson also wrote a draft of a constitution for Virginia. It took seriously both republicanism and the dangers of over-reaching government.

Jefferson wrote that if one branch of government stepped beyond its power, at least two-thirds of the other two branches could hold a convention to either correct the encroachment or to alter the Constitution of Virginia to allow it.

It makes sense for the different branches of government to hold each other accountable—and for the people to be allowed to make decisions about these cases.

Some people say this might give two of the branches an opportunity to team up against the third, but those two branches would need more than two-thirds of their members to be involved in the conspiracy.

Others say that bringing these cases to the public through a convention would erode the public’s trust in the government’s ability to function, but that would have to be the opinion of the majority before it would have an effect on the public’s perception.

Still others say that getting the public too interested in political discord would distract the public peace, but it is unrealistic to expect that not to happen. (The only reason it hasn’t happened before is that we’ve been united in a revolution.)

And the best objection comes from those who say that the people would not be able to judge fairly in these conventions because they would favor the Executive or Judicial over the Legislature. But the Legislature has the most direct influence on the people.

If we watch out for these concerns, the people should be able to make judgments about the government when needed.

Personal Thoughts:

I like that Hamilton and Madison seem to have read the Anti-Federalist Papers. They make specific references to their opposition’s arguments.

It’s hard to imagine an America that wasn’t divided by political disagreements.

Madison thinks the Legislature is most susceptible to “aggrandizement,” but I think history has shown it’s actually pretty willing to abdicate its powers to the other branches.

Isn’t it a conflict of interest to have members of the legislature participating in a convention to judge the legislature?

It seems like Madison goes from arguing to protect the legislature at the convention to arguing to control it.

“Passions ought to be controlled and regulated by the government.” ...Um, what?

[Full Text]

[disaffectedcitizen]

Don't Be a Sucker (1947)

They knew they were not strong enough to conquer a unified country. So they split Germany into small groups. They used prejudice as a practical weapon to cripple the nation.

…We human beings are not born with prejudices. Always, they are made for us. Made by someone who wants something. Remember that when you hear this kind of talk. Somebody’s going to get something out of it, and it isn’t going to be you.

…When that first minority lost out, everybody lost out.

…We must never let ourselves be divided by race or color or religion. Because in this country, we all belong to minority groups.

…We must guard everyone’s liberties, or we can lose our own. If we allow any minority to lose its freedom by persecution or by prejudice, we are threatening our own freedom.

…Here in America, it’s not a question of whether we tolerate minorities. America is minorities.

…We must not allow the freedom or dignity of any man be threatened by any act or word.

…Lets forget about “we” and “they.” Let’s think about us.

[disaffectedcitizen]

How The U.S. Got So Many Confederate Monuments

These commemorations tell a national story.

Confederate memorials aren't actually historical.

Most of these monuments did not go up immediately after the war’s end in 1865.... 

"The vast majority of them were built between the 1890s and 1950s, which matches up exactly with the era of Jim Crow segregation.”

They're literally symbols of racism.

[scripturesketches]

My Church Responds to “Unite the Right”

“White nationalists… they’re totally ignorant of the Gospel. They’re totally ignorant to our country’s history. And they are totally ignorant to the challenges men and women, boys and girls of color still can face every day.

…If you are a redeemed child of God, you distance yourself from this, and you call it for what it is: racism.

…Our God, the God of the Bible, has always been a defender of the week, a defender of widows, standing up for the fatherless, and being all about justice. And we are ignorant ourselves if we dismiss the blight, the stain that slavery has left on our nation.

…God would call us to stand up and label it for what it is. And it’s got no place in the life of a follower of Jesus.”

— Pastor Josh Lindstrom, Woodmen Valley Chapel (August 13, 2017)

[disaffectedcitizen]

Notes: Federalist Paper #48

Title: These Departments Should Not Be So Far Separated as to Have No Constitutional Control Over Each Other Author: Publius (James Madison) Date: February 1, 1788

Volume: 2 - The Proposed Constitution General topic: The structure of the new government Specific topic: The need for more than written separations of power

Big Idea:

Governments don’t respect mere written limitations, so we need something more substantial to maintain the separations of powers.

Favorite Lines:

“The powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments.”

“The legislative department alone has access to the pockets of the people.”

“‘One hundred and seventy-three despots would surely be as oppressive as one.’ [-Thomas Jefferson]”

“The acts of the body… deriving confidence from mutual example and joint influence, unauthorized measures would, of course, be more freely hazarded.”

“Mere demarcation on parchment of the constitutional limits of the several departments is not a sufficient guard against those encroachments which lead to a tyrannical concentration of all the powers of the government in the same hands.”

Paraphrased Outline:

Though the branches of government need to be separated, they still need some amount of control over each other.

There needs to be something stronger than mere written rules to keep the branches separate.

The Legislature is the most likely to try to step out of bounds. It’s powers are greater and less precise than the others, giving it more opportunity for abuse than the others.

We have seen examples of over-stepping legislatures in the state governments:

Thomas Jefferson wrote in his Notes on the State of Virginia that, despite expecting a separation of powers in the Virginia state government, the Legislature still took control the Executive and the Judiciary.

The Pennsylvania government set up a Council of Censors to ensure that its branches remained within their limits of power. It found that the Pennsylvania Legislature had stepped out of bounds on at least four counts.

We need something stronger than written rules to keep the powers of our government branches separate.

Personal Thoughts:

I would have guessed the Executive branch was the most likely to overstep its boundaries—but maybe it’s just more obvious than when the Legislative does it.

[Full Text]

[disaffectedcitizen]

Trump launches military strike against Syria

The United States launched a military strike Thursday on a Syrian government target in response to their chemical weapons attack that killed dozens of civilians earlier in the week.

"While we all condemn the atrocities in Syria, the United States was not attacked," Paul said. "The President needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate."

Senator Paul is absolutely right. So far, Trump’s foreign policy is impulsive, autocratic, and dangerous.

The U.S. and Russia have been on opposite sides of the Syrian civil war since it started, so we can expect that Russia—which had personnel at the targetted bases—will have a response to this interventionist attack.

It is not in the American people’s best interest to reignite the Cold War. This is horrifying.