|
|
halva
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Greece |
 Thu Apr 29, 2004 6:43 pm
|
 |
|
Mech, you didn't respond to the second part of my posting. |
| |
|
|
halva
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Greece |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:01 pm
|
|
|
Without waiting for Mech's reply, I would like to explain why I don't think the "Defence of the Constitution" stance is enough of a solution for Americans.
To be realistic, I think Americans should be trying to get a system under which it wouldn't matter if, say, Arnold Schwarzenegger became your President.
The American Constitution legimates a directly-elected executive presidency: a terrible, terrible, innovation in my book, in no way an advance on the constitutional monarchic constitution that emerged in Britain after the Glorious Revolution of 1688. This belief of mine led me to vote "no" in the 1999 constitutional referendum in Australia which would have introduced an Australian republic if "Yes" had prevailed.
Let me quote an interesting passage (from Arianna Stassinopoulou-Huffington's book "Fanatics and Fools" (p.162) where she refers to Schwarzenegger:
“Watching CNN two days before last Christmas, I saw Arnold visiting the Paso Robles area in California, which had just been hit by a devastating earthquake. Looking great, as he always does, and speaking with warmth and authority, he said, “We will rebuild this town square. We will restore the energy that made it a place that people want it to be. These buildings may have crumbled under the pressure of the quake, but I know for sure that the people will not buckle that easily.” The governor was genuinely reassuring and comforting. You could see it on the faces of the people in Paso Robles, and you could feel it even over the television.
And then it hit me.
Arnold would have made a great king. If California were a constitutional monarchy (and, who knows, maybe someone will get a referendum for that on the next ballot), Arnold would make the perfect figurehead. He could console victims of natural disasters. He could cut ribbons, hand out T-shirts, and sign autographs. He could preside with dignity over ceremonial events, wear fancy sashes and robes and swords, ride around in a gold plated, open-air Hummer, and give distinguished visitors a genuine movie star welcome. And, in the bargain, the people of California would not just get the perfect king, they would get a wonderful royal family with a beautiful and talented queen and four adorable princes and princesses.
Unfortunately, Arnold wasn’t crowned king. He was elected governor in a recall process that, at first, seemed too ridiculous to take seriously. For once, the late night monologue jokes seemed superfluous. But once the impact of Arnold’s budget cuts began to hit home, the laughter quickly faded, until the only ones still giggling were the governor himself and his big money backers.”
End of quote from Arianna. Halva continues:
I addressed the problems of the directly-elected executive presidency idea in the European Union in an article in Spectre a year and a half ago that was meant as a contribution to the European constitutional debate:
http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/waynehall.htm
Americans need a better constitution than the one you have.
You are not going to become a constitutional monarchy, so what can be done?
For a start, I think one of your objectives could be the annexation of Canada. Canada is a constitutional monarchy, so immediately your new state would be more like the European Union: a hybrid mixture of republics and constitutional monarchies. Each of the Canadian provinces is also a constitutional monarchy, so an innovation in your new United States of North America constitution would be that member states in your union may or may not be presided over by representatives of the British crown. Then you could introduce a new procedure for choosing your head of state, who would not have executive powers but would be like the Queen of England or the President of the Federal Republic of Germany. A Council of State could be created comprised fifty percent of US state governors and Canadian provincial governors and fifty percent of the heads of the (US) state or (Canadian) provincial legislatures (a possible innovation could be the same as that recommended in my article on the European Union: competition for a mandate between the existing legislatures and new “social forum” legislatures on the model at present being developed in the “altermondialiste” movement. That would mean that the representatives of the state or provincial legislatures could come either from the old legislatures or the new “social forums” depending on who had the mandate in that state or province.
In any case, this Council of State would be charged with the task of choosing the head of state (I suppose he/she would continue to be called President) of the United States of North America.
I suspect that Arianna Stassinopoulou would not be uninterested in ideas like these. Where would the capital of the new merged US/Canadian state be? Why not California?
The Pentagon in Washington could be demolished, or turned into a museum.
[Edited 4 times, lastly by halva on 04-29-2004] |
| |
|
|
halva
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Greece |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:42 pm
|
|
|
By the way, another very good participant who has been lost to CTC in all the recent nastiness is ShowMeTruth.
|
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:46 pm
|
|
|
Halva..you need to start a NEW TOPIC if you are going to BASH Americans...Mmmmk?
The SUBJECT of this thread is..."Changing the way CTC works."
JUST IN CASE you forgot.
Mabye I should start a thread bashing Greek red communists/socialists.
And ANOTHER thing..the ONLY one showing nastiness here lately was Mojoman with his constant FOWL mouth.
[Edited 2 times, lastly by Mech on 04-29-2004] |
| |
|
|
halva
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Greece |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:51 pm
|
|
|
I resist the temptation to wax humorous about the FOWL mouth.
Where is the America bashing Mech? Is a proposal that the USA should annex Canada your idea of America bashing? |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 8:53 pm
|
|
|
Canada SHOULD..by ALL means..remain a SOVERIEGN nation. Likewise for Mexico.
I am 100% opposed to a Pan-American Union. |
| |
|
|
JerseyBluEyz
Joined: 09 Jul 2003
Posts: 1257
Location: Northeast |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:17 pm
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by halva:
By the way, another very good participant who has been lost to CTC in all the recent nastiness is ShowMeTruth.
What do you mean? I noticed she's been gone but that was long before the recent Letxa banning situation arose. I figured she was busy at Arianna's forum fighting that Reynolds character and would come back when that whole show was over. No??? And yes, I would agree that a good member is lost if she does not return!
|
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:24 pm
|
|
|
The records show this person is still a member Halva.
Are you saying everyone left because boomerchick and MOjo were banned?
If they did., I say DON'T come back.
My 2 cents.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by Mech on 04-29-2004] |
| |
|
|
halva
Joined: 04 Apr 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Greece |
|
Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:49 am
|
|
|
SmT, like me, couldn't log in at the time there was the crash or whatever it was, and the banning of Gaiacomm.
I eventually got back in under another name and then Thermit facilitated my re-entry under my original name.
Last I heard from SmT on this subject she had not solved her logging-in problem at CTC. But that was some weeks ago. I don't know what, if anything, has happened since. |
| |
|
|
Wolf_Larson
Joined: 08 Aug 2003
Posts: 442
Location: The Sea |
|
Fri Apr 30, 2004 2:11 am
|
|
|
Halva, If you could change the American Constituion, how would you change it? |
| |
|
|
Mech
Joined: 06 Jun 2001
Posts: 8237
Location: THE 4th REICH USA |
|
Fri Apr 30, 2004 2:57 am
|
|
|
STAY ON TOPIC PLEASE..or discuss this ELSEWHERE!!!!
Got it? |
| |
|
|
 
|
|
 Goto page Previous
1, 2, 3
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat May 26, 2012 12:37 am
|
|
|
|
|
Login
