"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation….
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness… it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
These are the words of our founding document the Declaration of Independence. It basically says that the government's power comes from the people and if it isn't working it is our duty to replace that government. Words we should take seriously, but in today's world we have let ourselves be beaten down so much we feel we can't make a difference. We have been manipulated to be so scared that we think more government is the answer to protect us.
10 Things About Our Government
The founding fathers worked hard to build this country so it was not a monarchy but a republic. A republic where the elected officials are suppose to do what is best for all of the people, not just the ones that follow their beliefs or financial success. I am sure that in the time this was a great premise but did this country change so much over 200 years that even the foresight the founders had was blind to what we have today.
Our government was suppose to be of the people, for the people and by the people. We have turned it into a government and country of whining, complaining, greedy, arrogant, insensitive, selfish, petty, scared people. Is it really a surprise that we are so easily manipulated into dividing ourselves? When the amount of division that has happened, are we really surprised that we are in the situation we are in?
Is the government our founding fathers built ready to handle today's society or is it time to change it?
Candidates should not only adhere to the agenda they think we want
We are going through another election cycle and with it comes more and more issues. Why is it that candidates, and the people that vote for them, still do not understand that our government was built so elected officials are suppose to represent ALL people? The people that do not vote for them, the people that do not agree with them, the people that are not their constituents. If we only care about our own agenda and the politicians follow that, how can we really expect officials to really try to fix our country?
Why is it that if our candidate is not elected that we have to spend most of our time creating hate towards that official just because they do not follow our agenda or because their candidate was not elected? Are we really so self serving that we want these officials to fail simply because they are not who we wanted? How would we feel if we were hired for a job where half the people didn’t like us simply because we got the job? Even worse, they wanted us to fail at the job and would do their best to get us fired?
Are we really able to handle any candidate that runs a platform where they try to appeal to everyone that they will represent, Republicans, Democrats, Independents, black, white, gay, straight, rich, poor, voter, non voter?
Our beliefs do not have to be your beliefs
Each individual has their own personal beliefs, it is what helps us create purpose in our lives. Unfortunately, these same beliefs can also create division and hate. The only way this can happen is because we do not live by the understanding that everyone has a right to their beliefs and that not all beliefs are best for the country. Instead, we keep alive those same prejudices and judgments that the Founding Fathers used to keep black people, women and Native Americans out of the foundation of this country.
If 320 million people all have their own beliefs are we ready to agree to compromise that not all of them are what is best for the country? Are Christian voters ready to support a candidate who says homosexuals deserve to have the same rights as Christians? Are Black voters ready to believe that there are white candidates who will support and fight for black rights? Are we ready as a country to believe that we were not built to be a Christian nation if we allow freedom of religious expression? Are we ready to believe that a President who has served for 8 years has actually done alot of good for the country?
Are the people of this country ready to elect a politician that is willing to make decisions that are best for the country and the people, not necessarily for their own agenda or beliefs?
The golden rule doesn't have to apply
A lot of people believe that we live in oligarchy and that money is the real power behind everything. We believe that any candidate that receives money from what we believe is unreasonable sources, such as Super Pac's or Wall Street, they will only serve these sources. Money has been part of politics for a long time and instead of fighting against it, we just either throw more money at the problem or think we can't do anything about it. Why have we never asked the question about which is more of the problem, the character of the person or the money? Corruption is corruption no matter where the money comes from.
Politicians that need money to get elected aren't doing so because they have to, we have made it necessary for them to do so. In fact, it is so much part of politics as one of the many tools to manipulate us. Someone who donates $2 million dollars to a campaign and someone who donates $27 should be on the same level, get a candidate elected that is best for the country and the people. However, both instead donate so that they can get their agenda represented. That is where the real money issue is, that the candidate always thinks the person that gives them the most, or any at all, money should be the one whose agenda is pushed forward. Then these politicians use all of the money to manipulate us into either hating someone else or berating another candidate.
Just because a Muslim donates money to a candidate doesn’t mean the person should implement Sharia Law. Just because an unemployed person donates money doesn’t mean the candidate is going to be able to find them a job. Just because the NRA donates money doesn’t mean the person should always work towards gun rights.
Do we ever think today that we would ever elect someone that would just thank their donor without any obligation or even better doesn't need to take any donations at all. Then no matter what they do, they can't be accused of doing what is in the best interest of the donors.
Political parties do not serve a purpose
Do political parties really do anything other than keep us divided? We assume that Republicans are the only ones that will make this country better so we vote for them simply because they are Republicans. We assume that Democrats are the only ones that will make this country better so we vote for them simply because they are Democrats. Even Independents we think are the only ones that can make the country better so we vote for them simply because they are Independents. So if we are all drawing these lines, candidates included, how can anyone think this country can solve its division?
A lot of politics comes from the parties fighting with each other simply because they belong to the other party. So nothing of any value gets done and then they each blame the other party because the task was not done. We then take sides because we do not ask any questions, we just incorrectly assume we know and react accordingly. If this is the case, then why should we keep political parties?
Are we ready for a candidate that only talks about the issues without once caring about their party or any other person’s party.
Our government was never built for long term growth
Our government was created so Congress was suppose to be the decision makers of government while the President headed foreign affairs but was part of the checks and balances in everything else. With the tremendous growth of this country, the power of the President has become more necessary, even to the point of thinking they could do anything. Congress was built so that each state had a say in the way the country was run based on their constituents as well as the constituents of other states. However, now Congress is about making sure the other guy doesn't get what they want and about taking so much time bad mouthing the other side that nothing gets done.
Term limits was another idea that in today's country we are trying to destroy. The founding fathers wanted the chance for new ideas to come in or if the bad are part of the government to give us a chance to remove them. The House is elected every two years and Senators are every six, the President every four years. Congress has unlimited terms while the President only can serve 2 (which by the way was approved by Congress). This really would not be an issue if we used the power we were given and vote out the people that do not do what they are suppose to or took the time to realize maybe our candidate isn't what they represent.
Constitutional Amendments can also take time to create. Two thirds of the House and the Senate have to ratify the amendment and then three fourths of the states have to ratify an amendment before it becomes an amendment. Even though the 13th Amendment ended slavery, the 14th Amendment giving rights and freedoms to ex slaves took five more years to create. In that time how many people went back to becoming slaves, were killed or not given the right to vote?
As if the process is not slow enough, several people introduce the same bills, with only small differences. How does this not segregate the number of voters on the bill or create a bottleneck on getting the bill passed? For example, there are 2 Medicare for All bills where the only main difference is one takes 2 years to implement and one 4 years to implement. Why would you need two instead of one if you were able to come to compromises? Is credit for the bill more important than the bill itself? Does this government bureaucracy really allow for getting things done quickly and efficiently?
I am sure when the founding fathers created the system, financially backing each bill was very important and they didn't think of the taxpayers as a big piggy bank, unlike today. With our deficit as high as it is today, financial transparency should be a priority for passing a bill. Otherwise, if a bill is actually approved into law then time has to be spent trying to find the money for it which may include another bill. Politicians manipulate us so they can refill the bank instead of fixing the problem. Why would we ever want a bill that didn't show how it would be paid for, isn't that like paying for a car and then the salesman says he will tell you what the payment is later?
We want our candidates to make promises to us so that we have a reason to vote for them. Then when they don't keep these promises we get angry and ask why. The funny thing is that the promises they make to us most of the time they cannot do in the first place. No one knows what kind of Congress they will have or what the state of the country will be in when they take office. Then they say they are going to make several changes when the previously mentioned legislation process is slow.
Imagine a candidate that knows how the real government works and helps us to understand what he can promise now and what he can do later.
My vote doesn't deserve your opinion
Each person has a right to vote and be able to support a candidate without having to be attacked by the hate creators or social media. We arrogantly think that we have a right to instill our voice in other people, once again showing our agenda is more important. Does anyone deserve to be called names or have violent acts upon them just because of their right? As long as we attack people for this, the process is not for the people.
I have heard people say that people who do not vote should not complain about who is elected or that they are hurting one of the candidates. How is not voting because you do not have a candidate you like worse than voting for someone you do not really want but you hate the other candidate? Does that mean that people whose candidate didn’t get elected don't have a voice? Having a vote means everyone has the right to do with that vote what they want to better this country, even not voting for someone they do not believe in.
Do we believe in a candidate that would help people understand that they represent everyone and that having a different voice is okay. Helping people understand that attacking people because of their right and beliefs is bad no matter what is happening.
We should not be okay with hate creation
Social media has allowed people with agendas to create hate simply by writing tag lines for stories that have nothing to do with the tag lines. It has made it easy for people that never thought they had a voice before to use that voice even if it is creating hate. The really sad part of this is that we the people are okay with all this hatred because most of the time it falls in line with our own agenda or beliefs.
What we should be focusing on is that in the midst of all the hate, besides the real messages getting lost or even worse, we do not listen to someone that may have something good to say. We spend so much time actually creating internal 'hate' for someone or something that we are okay with attack ad's actually condemning people's character and person. Why would we want to exhaust all of that energy into hate and anger?
Wouldn't it be nice to have a candidate that doesn't feel the need to blast us with negative ad's or attacks on any group but instead let's us know what they are fighting for so we can make an informed decision.
They don't know everything
Why have we created such a picture of our candidates that we think they should know everything or that they can't change their beliefs depending on what is happening in the world. To have the same exact beliefs now that you had forty years ago is kind of small minded, since our country has changed so much in that forty years. Just because a person has not served in the military doesn't mean they cannot lead the military. Just because a candidate is gay doesn't mean they cannot do what is best for people of Christian values. Just because a person is single doesn't mean they can't do what is best for people with families. Just because a person is white doesn't mean they cannot do what is best for people of color.
We should be wanting a candidate strong enough to admit they do not know everything but that does not stop them from using good communication and compromise to get things done.
What are we willing to do?
The founding fathers wanted to build a country where the people were not always reliant on the government for their happiness. They took 50 little countries and asked them to act as one, something no other country has even attempted. They wanted people to have freedoms so that they we could use them to try to see each other as human beings and not statistics or groups. All of these are slowly being destroyed because of people's arrogance and internal fears.
If asked, I am sure that people will say government for the people can never exist. My response would be that our government was built to be in the people's hands but we are too busy blaming and berating each other trying to put together the illusion of a perfect society. That society doesn't exist and we need to get over it otherwise this country will continue to fall apart.
We have the power to continue what our founding fathers wanted and there are people that know it, that is why they are trying to stop us. If we had no power, why would politicians every election pimp themselves for our vote, to the point of telling us everything we want to hear or promising us everything we want for 'free'. If we had no power, why do companies spend millions of dollars to get us to continue to buy their product.
An individual doing something they believe is right, can make an impact. 320 million people coming together to do what they think is right cannot be stopped. That is where the real power is and maybe someday we will believe it.