[Peace-discuss] Democracy

[C. G. Estabrook]

[Here's an answer to the letter by Stan Marsh in yesterday's N-G. 
Marsh's letter is appended, as is the one of mine to which he's 
replying.  --CGE]


Editor, News-Gazette:

You published a letter ("AWARE's platitudes hides its menace," 19 April 
2007) -- as it happens, on the anniversary of the outbreak of the 
Revolutionary War -- that points out, perhaps surprisingly but 
nevertheless accurately, that the Founding Fathers did not believe in 
democracy.

In fact they were opposed to it, because they were generally wealthy men 
who feared that democracy would lead to attempts to lessen the gap 
between rich and poor.  The Constitution was written, in the words of 
its principal framer, James Madison, "to protect the minority of the 
opulent against the majority."

But democratic tendencies in America grew throughout the 19th century. 
That conflicted slave-owner, Thomas Jefferson, wrote in 1824 that 
citizens "are naturally divided into two parties: 1. Those who fear and 
distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the 
hands of the higher classes. 2. Those who identify themselves with the 
people, have confidence in them, cherish and consider them as the most 
honest and safe, although not the most wise depositary of the public 
interests."

Socialism, as it developed in Europe and America in the 19th, was part 
of the growing democratic ideal.  Why shouldn't the economy as well as 
the government be under democratic control?  Unfortunately, in the 20th 
century, the title of socialism was seized by anti-democratic groups, 
and American elites, who could no longer say that they were against 
democracy, were happy to let them have it.

But the world-wide movement for democracy continues.

--C. G. Estabrook

=================

	AWARE's platitudes hides its menace
	Thursday April 19, 2007

Local socialist C. G. Estabrook unsurprisingly wrote recently in defense 
of the local group AWARE, "the further left, the more democratic, and 
the further right, the less." He then defensively distances socialism 
from Marxism by stating, "The Soviet Communists, being undemocratic, 
were 'right wing' Marxists."

No kidding. Socialists, essentially advocates of centralized control 
over people's lives under the guise of democracy, establish political 
environments rife with such possibilities.

That's why the Founding Fathers had little use for pure democracy. 
Instead, they established a representative form of government called a 
republic. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution will you find the word democracy.

John Adams probably said it best, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. 
It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself." Socialists say, "Trust us. 
We know what's best. Let rule occur from the ground up – with us in 
charge so everybody tows the line."

Thomas Jefferson foresaw this, saying, "Hear no more of trust in men, 
but rather bind them down from mischief with the chains of the 
Constitution."

And Chief Justice John Marshall wrote, "Between a balanced republic and 
a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos."

To create a socialist democracy in America, which is the goal of the 
Socialist Party, there first must be the elimination of our 
constitutional republic. That means elimination of the U.S. 
Constitution, or such a radical revision of it as to destroy all that 
our Founding Fathers intended.

If some members of AWARE are not aware of this, they need to wise up. 
Certainly everybody else needs to wise up as well.

R. STAN MARSH

=============

Editor, News-Gazette

A piece on the editorial page ("Listen up, Mark has a message for 
you...," 24 March) described the local group AWARE ("Anti-War 
Anti-Racism Effort") as "socialist" and "left-wing," with no indication 
of how those terms were understood.  How about a real discussion of 
them?  Here for openers is what some members of AWARE mean by them:

1. Anti-war.  War may sometimes be necessary (not all AWARE members are 
pacifists), but not this time: the Bush administration is guilty of what 
the German leaders were condemned for at Nuremberg -- launching an 
aggressive war.

2. Anti-racism.  Having no good excuse, the administration has sold the 
war on the basis that the Arab people and culture are particularly 
violent towards Americans -- and to fill its "volunteer" army,  it's 
relied on the fact that poor people in America are disproportionately 
non-white.

3. Left-wing.  Since the terms were given a political sense more than 
two hundred years ago, left and right have described a spectrum of 
political positions -- the further left, the more democratic, and the 
further right, the less.  (The Soviet Communists, being undemocratic, 
were *right-wing* Marxists.)

4. Socialist.  From the origins of the modern capitalist economy, in 
which what is produced and what jobs are available are determined by a 
small group of rich people making corporate investment decisions, 
socialism (not the same as Communism) has been the name for the 
common-sense alternative that such things should be decided democratically.

--C. G. Estabrook

	###