A Very Unpolished Post, From Another Blog
Monday, 18. May 2009, 03:33:43
Here are my premises...
1. Freedom/liberty is protecting/respecting individual rights.
2. Rights properly defined are the only things that are obligatory between men.
3. That there has never been a nation with a constitution that has been explicit enough to protect those rights. That always some clause in all constitutions in existence that people follow have been flawed because they allow either interpretation because the clauses have vague words.
4. That a representational democracy is the only form of government that can withhold these rights ONLY when they have been defined for every aspect of objective law.
5. That if we could be in the power to write a constitution and that was the one that was ratified by a majority then if would have to be done in such a way that no clause could be vague enough to be weakened by interpretation.
6. That the fact that most men and women live by a altruist/ collectivist code of morality that they can not be trusted to keep proper rights, I give you the history of humankind as evidence.
7. I define rights the same way Ayn Rand did. i am a objectivist. Just a newbie.
8. That there should be meritocracy in government.
9. I believe that there should be checks and balance between the branches of government.
10. That the United States Constituation gives to much power to all branches even though they are seperated.
11. That Senators should have to take very hard and strenous tests and have so much education and be barred from office if they have ever done such and such thing. The tests would be desighned to keep out certain kinds of mentalities. So would all government employees. That's the meritocracy part.
12. That the goverment should be Objectivists in ideology via the clear dectates of the constution without discrenating at certain levels. (a senator would have to be a objectivist but the police cheif could be a Christian, Sikh or Jew, whatever)
13. That the method selecting representatives should be restricted by certain objective parameters. That they would have to have so much merit.
14. That their would be a unicameral legislature.
15. That their should be professional voters and electoral collage at the local and national level. (their would be no states to clamor for "state rights") and would vote for all members of government without campaigns.
16. That the president would be very restricted in what they could do. That they would be free to do their role but there would be very strict and objective limits to that role. They could not interact with any special interest groups that are political. Screened for any activity that goes against the national interest. For example that if they were ever Marxist even if the came clean.
17. That a doctrine of national self interest would be wrote into the constitution and it would fall on the legislature to formulate and monitor the political zeitgeist of other nations and as well as the presidents backed by military intelligence and appropriate military (intelligence agencies,) civilian (think tanks).
18. That since the constitution would be so explicit and thorough then that would be the "ultimate check and balance".
This is the start of it. I want feedback. So then my idea is the mixture in a non-contradictory fashion of "meritocracy" "republic" "laisez-faire capitalism protected by the constitution"...aka a Meritocratic Capitalist Republic.
1. Freedom/liberty is protecting/respecting individual rights.
2. Rights properly defined are the only things that are obligatory between men.
3. That there has never been a nation with a constitution that has been explicit enough to protect those rights. That always some clause in all constitutions in existence that people follow have been flawed because they allow either interpretation because the clauses have vague words.
4. That a representational democracy is the only form of government that can withhold these rights ONLY when they have been defined for every aspect of objective law.
5. That if we could be in the power to write a constitution and that was the one that was ratified by a majority then if would have to be done in such a way that no clause could be vague enough to be weakened by interpretation.
6. That the fact that most men and women live by a altruist/ collectivist code of morality that they can not be trusted to keep proper rights, I give you the history of humankind as evidence.
7. I define rights the same way Ayn Rand did. i am a objectivist. Just a newbie.
8. That there should be meritocracy in government.
9. I believe that there should be checks and balance between the branches of government.
10. That the United States Constituation gives to much power to all branches even though they are seperated.
11. That Senators should have to take very hard and strenous tests and have so much education and be barred from office if they have ever done such and such thing. The tests would be desighned to keep out certain kinds of mentalities. So would all government employees. That's the meritocracy part.
12. That the goverment should be Objectivists in ideology via the clear dectates of the constution without discrenating at certain levels. (a senator would have to be a objectivist but the police cheif could be a Christian, Sikh or Jew, whatever)
13. That the method selecting representatives should be restricted by certain objective parameters. That they would have to have so much merit.
14. That their would be a unicameral legislature.
15. That their should be professional voters and electoral collage at the local and national level. (their would be no states to clamor for "state rights") and would vote for all members of government without campaigns.
16. That the president would be very restricted in what they could do. That they would be free to do their role but there would be very strict and objective limits to that role. They could not interact with any special interest groups that are political. Screened for any activity that goes against the national interest. For example that if they were ever Marxist even if the came clean.
17. That a doctrine of national self interest would be wrote into the constitution and it would fall on the legislature to formulate and monitor the political zeitgeist of other nations and as well as the presidents backed by military intelligence and appropriate military (intelligence agencies,) civilian (think tanks).
18. That since the constitution would be so explicit and thorough then that would be the "ultimate check and balance".
This is the start of it. I want feedback. So then my idea is the mixture in a non-contradictory fashion of "meritocracy" "republic" "laisez-faire capitalism protected by the constitution"...aka a Meritocratic Capitalist Republic.
WIDGETIZE