[Peace-discuss] local issues

[John W.]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:53 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu> wrote:

Unless persuaded otherwise, I'll vote for the constitutional convention and
> against the sales tax increase.
>
> *Some of the opposition to the constitutional convention looks like coming
> from those who fear Hamilton's "great beast." The attitude seems to be that
> politics should remain under the control of competent professionals -- God
> knows what might happen if you let the redneck majority get their hands on
> it.  But it seems to me that Jefferson's balanced comment should guide us,
> if we take democracy seriously, when he distinguished between "Those who
> fear and distrust the people, and wish to draw all powers from them into the
> hands of the higher classes [and] 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."


It's just absolutely amazing to me, Carl, how you are able to hold two
diametrically opposite points of view and not perceive any inconsistency
between them.  Here is a perfect example.

1) Hamilton's "great beast" will, if given the chance, sculpt a new Illinois
Constitution that will be an improvement over the 1970 version and in the
best interests of Illinois citizens.

2) Everything in American society is controlled for nefarious purposes by
some sort of elite - the "tertiary meritocracy" or whatever the hell you
call it - aided and abetted by Big Media.

The only way I can harmonize these two thoughts is to conclude with what I
think is the truth, actually - the political/socioeconomic elite in Illinois
will prevent the "great beast" from having anything meaningful to do with
creating a new constitution, and the "great beast" will be so uninformed and
confused that they'll have no idea what they're actually voting on, or what
the implications are.

For my part, John Bambenek is in favor of an Illinois Constitutional
Convention.  That's all I need to know.  If he's for it, I'm against it.
Anyone who has read Bambi through the years will know precisely what I'm
talking about.



> *Sales taxes are regressive.  The objection that this one is for school
> facilities (a good thing) doesn't overcome that problem, because in fact it
> may not indeed go to the schools.  As Dianna Visek pointed out in a good
> comment in the N-G two weeks ago, "When the General Assembly instituted a
> state lottery, it promised to use the money for education.  Although it was
> indeed used for education, the Legislature reduced the school money coming
> from the General Fund by the same amount ... Whatever money we raise locally
> will end up reducing the money coming from the state."


Have to agree with you here, though I don't know what the alternative is
other than a total restructuring of society.  (I also don't know what it has
to do with Karen's three questions.)  I do know that throwing more and more
money at the public schools, within the context of the arid American
intellectual, cultural, and moral climate, doesn't produce more educated
children.

John Wason




>  --CGE
>
>
> Karen Medina wrote:


>  Dear Peace Discuss,
>>
>> I'm just wondering about various takes on:
>> * The Illinois Constitutional Convention.
>
> * The Champaign School Board wanting to use the Park District land to
>> expand Garden Hills school
>> * The Champaign City Council's treatment of Linda Abernathy.
>>
>> Sorry that 2 of them are Champaign topics. But they do impact Urbana in
>> the long run.
>>
>> -karen medina
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace-discuss/attachments/20081022/ea56242d/attachment.htm