Home » Posts tagged "Democracy"

Arizona Politicians Join Forces in Bi-Partisan “Democracy Forum”

Arizona Politicians Join Forces in Bi-Partisan “Democracy Forum”











Tucson, Arizona (PRWEB) October 25, 2010

Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Arizona’s Secretary of State Ken Bennett (R) will team up at a “Democracy Forum” on October 30 in Tucson to promote civil discourse on the key national issues of immigration and the economy. Dr. Peter Likins, President Emeritus of the University of Arizona, will emcee the free, public event taking place from 1:30 until 4 p.m. at the Arizona Historical Society/Museum.

At the Forum, Secretary Bennett and Congressman Grijalva, who are from differing political parties, will each present their position on immigration and the economy then the audience will ask questions, discuss the issues and vote on them. The National Student/Parent Mock Election is spearheading the Democracy Forum, which is designed to bring parents, grandparents, children and public officials together in a bipartisan, intergenerational, multi-ethnic forum.

“Recent heated public debates on vital national issues – including immigration here in Arizona – have centered on much hate and vitriol, manifested in public protests, in the media and in our schools. Our forum’s purpose is to counter that trend, exemplifying how bipartisan discussions and disagreement can exist within a content of decency,” said Gloria Kirshner, president of the National Student/Parent Mock Election.

Other event highlights include:

Borderlands Theaters will present excerpts from its hit show “Arizona: No Roosters in the Desert,” a play about four women’s trek toward the American dream.
A patriotic/ historic costume contest for all ages.
Professor Emeritus at Arizona State University, Bruce Mason, will speak about the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances and explore the history of protest movements in America since colonial days.
Dr. Rudy Byrd from the Sons of the American Revolution will explain why Spanish soldiers voluntarily sent parts of their salary to the Revolutionary army and how, records show, teenagers and minorities endured extreme hardships to win America’s democracy.
Video of former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and other celebrities including Morgan Freeman, Reese Witherspoon, and Whoopi Goldberg heralding the Declaration of Independence and current American freedoms.
“We hope that by increasing their understanding of the past and evoking empathy for the current predicaments of their fellow human beings, we can help today’s young Americans envision and work toward the common good, using civil discourse and respect as tools to achieve their goal.

We want to prepare Americans of all ages to pass the torch of democracy – still burning brightly with the values for which the founding fathers fought,” added Kirshner.

The National Student/Parent Mock Election’s Democracy Forum planning committee includes Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett; Congressman Raul Grijalva; Dr. John Pedicone, currently a candidate for superintendent of Tucson Unified School District, vice president of the Southern Arizona Leadership Council and senior fellow at the University of Arizona; Dr. June Web-Vignery, executive director of the Metropolitan Education Commission, historian and author; and Dr. Peter Likins, president emeritus of the University of Arizona. Pearson, the education services and technology company, is a sponsor of the National Student/Parent Mock Election.

The event is free and open to the public, but seating is limited. Please call (520) 797-7590 or email nspme(at)aol(dot)com to reserve a seat.

About the National Student/Parent Mock Election

The NSPME is the nation’s oldest, largest and most successful voter-education project, dating from 1980. Since the first Mock Election in 1980, nearly 50 million young voters have cast their ballots and, in the process, discovered what it means to be an American citizen and the value of citizenship in our democracy. Visit http://www.nationalmockelection.org for more information.

Contact:

Gloria Kirshner

520.742.9943

NSPME(at)aol(dot)com

http://www.nationalmockelection.org

Kate Miller

kate(dot)miller(at)pearson(dot)com

800-745-8489

# # #





















Vocus©Copyright 1997-

, Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.
Vocus, PRWeb, and Publicity Wire are trademarks or registered trademarks of Vocus, Inc. or Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.







Find More Citizenship And Freedom Press Releases

Why is freedom of religion necessary for a functioning democracy?

Question by nikki: Why is freedom of religion necessary for a functioning democracy?
*use modern example to prove your point.

I just need some help with my presentation. this is only of of the questions i have to present about freedom of religion and i was having a hard time with it. so if you could help me out, i would really appreciate it.
please and thankyou<3 Best answer:

Answer by Toadly Ossum
It seems to be accepted that 85% of the population needs to be in compliance with a law in order for it to be effective. A lower level of compliance ties up too many enforcement resources to be effective.

For any society, there must be a common moral character to encourage compliance. Among different religions, there are still common moral themes upon which most can agree to establish a law. Where only one religion prevails, or none, government becomes a theocracy, establishing laws based upon the teachings of the elite few.

Whether or not there is really morality to those laws is impossible to establish since there are no other moral precepts to compare them to. By permitting several religions, morality for laws can be drawn from most of them, tolerance of the differences among them, and only the least acceptable of those need to be prohibited.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Jeremy Scahill Comments on the Death of Osama Bin Laden & the US-led War on Terror (Democracy Now!)

DemocracyNow.org – The manhunt for Osama Bin Laden is over. Nearly 10 years after the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, US forces are said to have assassinated the Saudi-born founder of Al Qaeda inside Pakistan. At the time of his death, Bin Laden was living in a heavily fortified mansion just a mile from the Pakistani Army’s principal military academy. The US operation was reportedly carried out by 25 Navy Seals under the command of the Joint Special Operations Command. It is unclear what role Pakistan played in the killing. For analysis, Democracy Now! interviews Jeremy Scahill, the national security correspondent for The Nation magazine. This clip is part of an hour-long roundtable discussion about Bin Laden’s death and the ongoing war on terrorism. Click here to watch the entire interview: www.democracynow.org For the video/audio podcast, transcript, to sign up for the daily news digest, and for Democracy Now!’s comprehensive news archive on reports on the 9/11 terror attacks and the resulting war in Afghanistan, visit www.democracynow.org FOLLOW US: Facebook: www.facebook.com Twitter: @democracynow Please consider supporting independent media by making a donation to Democracy Now! today, visit www.democracynow.org
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Osama bin Laden’s Useful Death Paul Craig Roberts www.infowars.com www.prisonplanet.tv May 3, 2011 In a propaganda piece reeking of US Triumphalism, two alleged journalists, Adam Goldman and Chris Brummitt, of the Associated Press or, rather, of the White House Ministry of Truth, write, or copy off a White House or CIA press release that “Osama bin Laden, the terror mastermind killed by Navy SEALs in an intense firefight, was hunted down based on information first gleaned years ago (emphasis added) from detainees at secret CIA prison sites in Eastern Europe, officials disclosed Monday.” “No credible image to show Osama killed by US Special Forces.” How many Americans will notice that the first paragraph of the “report” justifies CIA prisons and torture? Without secret prisons and torture “the terror mastermind” would still be running free, despite having died from renal failure in 2001. How many Americans will have the wits to wonder why the “terror mastermind” who defeated not merely the CIA and the FBI, but all 16 US intelligence agencies along with Israel’s Mossad and the intelligence services of NATO, who defeated NORAD, the National Security Council, the Pentagon and Joint Chiefs of Staff, the US Air Force, and Air Traffic Control, who caused security procedures to fail four times in US airports in one hour on the same day, who caused the state-of-the-art Pentagon air defenses to fail, and who managed to fly three airliners into three buildings with pilots who did
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Democracy, Up Close and Personal: A Pocket Guide to the U.S. Constitution

Democracy, Up Close and Personal: A Pocket Guide to the U.S. Constitution











New York, NY (PRWEB) February 7, 2011

What does the Constitution mean? It is the cornerstone of our democracy, but many of the available portable versions don’t include the information to help us understand it. Pearson’s new A Pocket Guide to the U.S. Constitution, by Andrew B. Arnold, remedies this situation by explaining, in straightforward terms, the significance and history of each clause and amendment. In a portable format, readers are equipped with the knowledge and vocabulary necessary to pursue in more depth the topics that interest them most.

The Constitution gains much of its meaning through the ways that it has been interpreted by the Supreme Court, and A Pocket Guide lists the key opinions that give the document’s provisions the force of specific law. Focusing on how the meaning of the Constitution has changed through history in response to a changing nation, Arnold explains the Commerce Clause, the Takings Clause, the Establishment Clause, and the other named clauses that many politicians, news writers, and professors assume Americans already understand.

“The Constitution is not just a matter of scholarly or legal debate; it is part of the way Americans live, and many of the available versions leave out the names of articles, sections, and clauses,” said Arnold. “This book does not tell readers what the Constitution ought to mean, but what it has meant. It is a place to begin to understand the U.S. Constitution, and a guide to answer basic questions that arise day to day, or in a classroom, or in the course of reading more in-depth books on the subject.”

About the Author

Andrew B. Arnold teaches Constitutional History at Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, as well as other courses. A specialist in U.S. labor and business history, his ongoing research focuses on the Gilded Age coal and railroad industries. Early in his career, he was asked to develop an advanced college-level course in Constitutional History. Frustrated by the lack of a basic, pocket-sized reference for his students, he wrote this book to help them gain a mastery of the Constitution as a document in itself.

About Pearson Learning Solutions

Pearson Learning Solutions is a business unit within Pearson (NYSE: PSO) the world’s leading learning company. As an education partner and consultant to higher education institutions, Pearson Learning Solutions is committed to designing total, client-driven education solutions. We are a team of world-class education experts, instructional designers, curriculum development experts, education course writers, development editors and experienced textbook publishers. We tailor solutions to each institution’s individual needs, including off-the-shelf online, in-classroom or blended courses, or fully customized curriculum development. We also provide a range of technology tools and learning platforms to help students, faculty and institutions succeed. For more information, visit http://www.pearsonlearningsolutions.com/.

Contact:

Rod Granger

Pearson

1-800-745-8489

rod.granger(at)pearson(dot)com

###





















Vocus©Copyright 1997-

, Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.
Vocus, PRWeb, and Publicity Wire are trademarks or registered trademarks of Vocus, Inc. or Vocus PRW Holdings, LLC.







Related The Constitution Press Releases

Is democracy viable?

Is democracy viable?
Those who see hope in the Middle East uprisings seem to assume they will lead in the direction of freedom or democracy. There is already talk about the “liberation” of Egypt, even though the biggest change there has been that a one-man dictatorship has been replaced by a military dictatorship that has suspended the constitution.
Read more on The Longview News-Journal

Arc of hope across the region
The wave of popular uprisings sweeping the Middle East takes my mind back to a book I read some time ago. Published in 2009, the book’s portion on the Arab world would have to be substantially recast if it was being written today.
Read more on Khaleej Times

Why Equating LKY to Nelson Mandela is (maybe even more) Stupid
With reference to your article “Why Equating LKY to Saddam Hussein is Stupid”, it reminds me of an equally “stupid” comparison of our Venerable Lee Kuan Yew with a larger than life figure Nelson Mandela, by a certain citizen who dished out a cool $ 10k on a platter for the best seller “Hard Truths: To […]
Read more on The Temasek Review

Convicted RFK assassin denied parole
A California state panel on Wednesday denied parole for Sirhan B. Sirhan, saying the convicted assassin of Robert F. Kennedy hasn’t demonstrated an understanding of the “magnitude” of his crimes.
Read more on CNN

Debunking the Myth of Freedom and Democracy in America with Facts and Overseas Experiences

•    “America is the epitome of democracy, the best form of government the world has ever known. The world envies our form of government by the people.”
•    “America is the freest nation on Earth.”
•    “In America we have something called freedom which those in other countries don’t have and wish they did.”
•    “It’s a free country.”
•    “Everyone in the rest of the world dreams of coming to America.”

These cherished fanatical beliefs of America and its propagandists have no actual basis in fact or reality, yet they are chanted by many Americans, their media and education system as a religion and set of Gospel truths that are universally agreed upon and unquestionable. Thus they are the antithesis to a free-thinking and truth-seeking mind.

This is not an essay promoting anti-Americanism, but merely exposes the truth. We compare fact vs. fiction, reality vs. BS, truth vs. propaganda, and experience vs. illusion. Truth is our bottom line, not conformity.

What is very revealing is that only those Americans who have never left their country for long believe in these myths, whereas American expats who have lived in multiple countries or are well-traveled (including me) do NOT, but in fact KNOW that they are hogwash.  Now, what does that tell you?!

As a matter of fact, America is alone in believing that it is the epitome of freedom and democracy. The rest of the world does not share these myths about America. Even fascist regimes, dictators and terrorists do not see America as a “free country” (contrary to what Hollywood and the US media misportray). Rather, they see America as an evil Imperial Empire trying to take away the freedoms of the rest of the world, and attempting to dominate and control everyone to take advantages of their resources! (they did that to the Native American Indians, so why wouldn’t they do that with the rest of the world too?)

(Remember that no one considers themself to be “the bad guy”. Even Hitler and Stalin do not view themselves as “evil” or “bad guys”. They found excuses and reasons to justify in their own mind whatever atrocities they committed as “righteous”.)

These facts shatter these cherished American myths about itself, exposing them for what they really are – pure self-propaganda. Thus, America will NEVER confront these facts, only deny them, for they destroy the propaganda of delusions and illusions that hold the country’s morale together.

With that, I ask: Why does America perpetuate the myth that it is the only country in the world that has “freedom” and indoctrinates its citizens with this belief, when this is not supported by any facts, not agreed by the rest of the world or even by well-traveled Americans?

We will get into the reasons why later.

These myths about freedom and democracy are programmed into the American populace, who are taught to chant them like religious mantras without thought or critical examination. There is no question that it’s a form of brainwashing.

The few who think outside the box and are able to bypass their programming see through the falsity of these lies. However, there is a price to pay for knowing the truth, which in this case is to be subject to the ridicule and contempt of the herd mentality for not conforming to its religious fanaticism, all in the name of patriotism and pride. So much for “freedom”.

Let’s dissect these myths and see how they match up to facts, commmon sense and real life experiences:

1) “America is the epitome of freedom and democracy for the world to emulate. It is the ideal form of government by the people that the world envies.”

We will get into freedom later, but for now, let’s address the democracy issue.  Technically, a democracy is defined as a “rule by the majority”.  Hollywood, the media and our education system all chant that America is the epitome of democracy as though it were a Gospel Truth that is universally agreed upon (but it is not by far). It is so ingrained in our culture that most never dare to question it.

The founding fathers never intended America to be a democracy and in fact didn’t even believe in one. Most Americans would be shocked to learn this. Anyone who casually researches the American form of government and its founding in the late 18th Century will see that technically, America was not set up as a democracy but as a Constitutional Republic.

A Republic is “rule by law” and tends to be the most just and stable form of government, protecting the rights of its citizens while limiting the power of government to a minimal level.

The first video above contains quotes from the founding fathers expressing their thoughts on democracy, which you will see was anything but positive.

In fact, there is no mention of the word “democracy” in the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. Even the Pledge of Allegiance cited by school children mentions that America is a Republic:

“I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

The founding fathers were intellectual elites who knew their history. They knew that a democracy was unsustainable, for it was in essence a rule by a lawless mob. The fundamental flaw in a democracy is that the majority is unrestrained.

Critics of democracy use this revealing analogy:  “Democracy is like three wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner.” In other words, if 51 percent of the population voted to harm or seize the property of the other 49 percent, who’s going to protect the 49 percent? This reveals the inherent flaw in democracy, which America does not dare bring light to.

In fact, the US Constitution and Bill of Rights were designed to PROTECT you FROM a democracy! (Most Americans would flip if they heard that) For example, in a true democracy, or a “rule by majority”, if most people in your town voted to seize your property and hang you, your assets would be confiscated and you’d be hanged. Simple as that. But in a Republic with a Constitution of rights, your rights and property are protected by law. If you are accused of anything, you have the right to a fair trial. That’s how a Republic works. And that’s how it PROTECTS you from a true democracy.

The ancient Greeks tried having a true democracy, but it failed, led to chaos and eventually to oligarchy. Even the greatest Greek philosopher, Socrates, did not believe in a true democracy. He advocated that the wisest and most virtuous rule society, not the common populace. In Plato’s great work “The Republic”, Socrates likened a “democracy” to the crew of a ship committing mutiny against their captain and taking the helm. In such a scenario, the ship, run by “the mob”, would never be run efficiently nor get to its proper destination, as the mutineers would constantly bicker, quarrel and change their minds. There would be no order. The ship would be blown around by the wind, so to speak.

So why doesn’t a true democracy work, you might ask? Well you see, most people are followers, not leaders or thinkers. They are emotional, not logical or rational. Being gullible, they are changeable on a whim, quick to jump to conclusions, and not wise. A true democracy is like having a mob take control (as in Socrates’ example above) without laws or protection. It is neither efficient, stable nor sustainable. And besides, there is no logical reason to presuppose that the majority is always right either. As the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius said, “The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding onself in the ranks of the insane.”

Though on paper, America began as a Constitutional Republic, it gradually evolved into a form of oligarchy (rule by the elite), plutocracy (rule by the rich) and corporatocracy (rule by corporations). These terms are more accurate to describe America’s governance than the term “democracy”. Any unbrainwashed observer can see why. Yet the elite continue to perpetuate the democracy propaganda to instill patriot religious pride and fervor in its citizens, to get their compliance and obedience (ironically). They see it as a “necessary illusion” as Noam Chomsky, the renowned intellectual and American critic, would say.

Nevertheless, there are some who will try to argue that America is a “representative democracy” or a “Constitutional democracy”. And in fact the school system uses such terms too. But this is just a play on semantics and grasping at straws in an attempt to try to insert the word “democracy” into the equation to try to validate the cherished belief that America is a democracy. But either way you look at it, America cannot be a democracy because in a democracy, the majority rules, and in America the majority certainly does not rule in any way, for so many reasons (we can’t even cover them all here). Rather, the majority in America are masses of sheeple the elite control and manipulate in the interest of the economy and their agenda.

In addition, consider the following:

a) According to polls, most Americans do not feel that they have a say in their government or its policies, and do not feel that their vote even matters. (Hence voter turnout during elections tends to be under 50 percent) There is a good reason for that. The government and the elite who run it often act in contrary to the will of the people.  

For example, most Americans did not want the Vietnam War or the Iraq War, yet the US leaders insisted on them and shoved them down our throats, with the help of the media of course (see the film “War Made Easy” on Google Video). People also do not want higher taxes, yet the government continually raises them.

So, if a democracy is a “rule by majority” then how come most people have no say in the country’s policy making, either foreign or domestic? That says a lot, yet most Americans still believe the democracy myth. (Fortunately though, with the surge in the conspiracy movement and the internet, more Americans are beginning to wake up everyday)

b) According to the historical track record, no matter who holds the office of President, whether Democrat or Republican, Conservative or Liberal, US policies, both foreign and domestic, remain the same.  Thus, critics liken the whole political system to a show or theater, since the power networks that own both parties really represent the same interests. The system is designed to maintain the illusion of democracy, to appease the gullible dumbed down public.

Therefore, people don’t really have a say in the policies their government sets. They are simply given the chance to elect Presidents every four years, and Congressmen and Senators every few years, as an illusion of some control in the democratic process. In reality though, no matter who gets elected, the power networks (corporate giants, banking elite, military industrial complex, secret societies, etc.) make sure they are in control. They are the real masters, not the President of the United States, who is merely a fall guy.

Why do you think that US Presidents tend to reneg on their campaign promises that won them the election? Do you think any man likes going back on his word and breaking his promises in front of the whole country’s population? I don’t think so. It’s obviously because he has no choice, since he’s not really at the top of the hierarchy and cannot do whatever he wants. He is controlled by a “shadow network”, where his real allegiance lies. Otherwise he wouldn’t be in office, or he better submit to them if he wants to remain in office, lest he suffer the consequences (as JFK, our last real President, did, which was a warning to all that followed).

The elite merely need to present the illusion of democracy to appease the masses. And they do it by giving you the charade of political elections, and calling it “democracy”. All they have to do is control the tiny pool of candidates that you have to choose from, in one form or another, and they remain in power, NOT you. That is why no matter who is elected, policies (including covert ones) remain the same.

Of course, the elite themselves don’t believe in a democracy either, for a true democracy would usurp their power. Therefore, they are knowingly spreading myths that they don’t believe themselves, which is both hypocritical and deceitful.

c) Immigrants and foreigners from other countries do not usually say “Wow we have so much freedom and democracy in America which we never had in our own native country” as Hollywood portrays. Go ahead and ask them yourself. They do not come to America for its freedoms or democracy, but to earn the almighty dollar and pursue career opportunities. In reality, most in the rest of the world do not see America as an “ideal democracy” but many do see it as an ideal country for making money and pursuing higher career opportunities.

Furthermore, it is not true that most people in the rest of the world want to live in America.  Immigrants to the US are predominantly from Asia or Mexico, who come to make money, not for “freedom”.  In fact, a large percentage of immigrants regret coming to America, feeling lonely and isolated and wishing they were back in their homeland, which the US media never covers of course.  

See these revealing thoughts and feelings of immigrants in the US which I’ve put together:  

http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page32.htm

Of course, America does not bother to try to explain away any of these major discrepancies. It doesn’t have to. It only needs to keep the public dumbed down with mass entertainment, and busy with working and consuming, to be left alone to do whatever it wants. America doesn’t really care if you see through its lies, and it knows that dissidents will always exist. You can say or think whatever you want, as long as you don’t DO anything to upset its power or agenda.

And that brings us to the next myth…

2) “America is the freest nation on Earth. Our enemies hate our freedoms, and the rest of the world envies it.”

This one really takes the cake.  Even as a school kid, I always thought it was odd that we were constantly told that “America is the freest country on Earth” yet I was forced to go to school, do homework everyday, and would get a “detention slip” if I wasn’t in class when the bell rang. My everyday life did not seem “free” at all, yet I was constantly told that it was, as though it were a religion.

The problem is that this fanatical claim is very vague, not specific at all, and not supported by anything except the US media, Hollywood and education system. It has no actual substance or basis to it, and it makes no sense either. This statement is more of a religion than a fact.

What’s especially revealing is that no one who is really well traveled believes that America is the “freest” in the world. Only those who have never left the US buy into it. What does that tell you?! That in itself is very shattering to this American myth.

Now, if America were truly free, do you think it would constantly have to boast about it to reassure itself? Such blatant boistering is usually the mark of an insecurity or inferiority complex, not the sign of a happy free people. As one of my forum members wrote:

“As a person of intelligence doesn’t need to tell others he is intelligent, a truly free society doesn’t need to be told it is free.”

In fact, America is alone in believing that it is the epitome of freedom. The rest of the world does not share this myth about America. Even fascist regimes, dictators and terrorists do not see America as a “free country” (contrary to what Hollywood and the US media misportray). Rather, they see America as an Imperial Empire trying to take away the freedoms of the rest of the world, and attempting to dominate and control everyone to take advantages of their resources! (they did that to the Native American Indians, so why wouldn’t they do that with the rest of the world too?)

For some reason, Hollywood and the US media perpetuate this bizarre stereotypical image that ALL countries outside the US are living under facist regimes governed by martial law, with soldiers and machine guns pointed at everyone, keeping them in terror, and that America is the only country free from all that. This is totally bogus and laughable, yet many Americans seriously believe it, sadly enough.

The reality is that most countries do NOT live under facist dictatorships. Yet America claims to be the only country that’s “free” of fascism, using the worst examples of dictatorial regimes to contrast itself. In doing so, America uses a classic advertising technique of comparing the best of your side with the worst of the other side, which is a total misrepresentation and fallacy. (a more accurate and logical comparison would be to compare typical examples from both sides).

American culture, media and movies insinuate all the time that all foreign countries are under oppressive fascist regimes, while America alone fights for freedom and democracy. This is extremely inaccurate and does not reflect reality at all. Yet America will NEVER confront this fact of course, for it destroys the propaganda of illusions that hold the country’s morale together.

Hollywood is also fond of portraying all immigrants as idolizing America’s freedom, and all terrorists as jealous of America’s freedom and plotting to eliminate its threat to fascism.

For instance, in the 1985 film Invasion USA starring Chuck Norris, an army of terrorists break into Florida during the Christmas Season. While parked in a suburban neighborhood, the leader of the terrorists looks around at families celebrating Christmas in their homes, and then mutters something about “Americans enjoying their freedom” (in accordance with the myth that America’s enemies hate its freedoms) before using a bazooka to blow up some homes. For some reason, Hollywood likes to portray America’s myths rather than reality and is the epitome of stereotypes. Call that a conspiracy if you like.

Now let’s dissect the concept of America being “the freest country”.

What does America mean by “free” exactly?  That you are free to do whatever you want without any laws or rules?  Certainly not!  As in every country, America has many laws, regulations and controls that you must abide under.  Such vary from country to country of course, but there is no evidence to suggest that America’s laws are much more lax than that of most countries.  On the contrary, government regulations are much more stringent in America, which is one reason why corporations are outsourcing, besides cheaper labor costs.

In reality, in most countries, is that as long as you have money for transportation and accommodation, and you don’t break any laws, you are “free” to go wherever you want on public lands, visit any attractions you like, eat, drink and be merry.  So how is that any different in America?  What exactly are you “free” to do in America that you can’t do anywhere else?

In fact, arguably, since America is one of the most expensive countries in the world to live or travel in, one’s purchasing power is diminished there, whereas it is multiplied much greater in third world countries. Thus, one’s ability to “purchase their freedom” is greatly diminished in the US. So if you define freedom by purchasing power, then in that sense the US is “less free” than cheaper third world countries where your purchasing power would be much greater. Any expat living in third world countries (e.g. Philippines, Thailand, Costa Rica, etc.) will tell you this.  And sorry Hollywood and CNN, but virtually none of these expats will say that they are “less free” outside the US.  In fact, they tend to say that they are “more free” outside the US, which shatters Hollywood’s stereotypical propaganda.

(You might also be surprised to know that no one I’ve met who’s been to the Middle East reports that it is less free than in America, despite the extreme black and white Islamic laws there. They all report that the US media’s image of the Middle East is total BS. And in fact, Arabs from the Middle East do not consider America to be “freer” than where they came from, since they define “freedom” differently. However, funnily enough, one freedom they do have in the Middle East, that you don’t have in America, is that they can show up for a job late and not worry about getting fired; they will only get their pay docked.)

Here are some examples from eloquent expat letters. As you can see, they definitely feel freer and happier in other countries. (So much for Hollywood’s propaganda)

http://www.happierabroad.com/Great_Letters.htm

In addition, many countries have freedoms not possible in America. For example, Holland has far more liberal laws regarding drugs and prostitution, and is far less prudish or puritannical about sex than America. In Europe in general, there is more of a lively social scene and connectedness, giving you the “freedom” to meet more people, make more friends and socialize more, contrary to the US environment where strangers do not usually speak to each other except for business purposes, where “every man is an island”, where there is an “ice barrier” between strangers, and where people are paranoid of each other. In addition, in most countries, a man can flirt with a girl, woo her, or ask her out without feeling like a “creep” or “predator”, unlike in America.

In Latin America, one can dance freely or hold salsa fiestas out in their neighborhood on a whim, whereas in America it would be inappropriate and out of bounds. Also, in Russia and many other countries, one can walk around outside drinking beer, whereas in the US that is illegal. So you see, there are many “freedoms” that are only possible outside the US. Thus the American assumption that “Anything not possible in America is not possible anywhere else cause America is the greatest in all things” is factually false.

Jeremy Rifkin, author of The European Dream, sums up the difference between the idea of “freedom” in Europe vs. America, explaining why the European concept is more evolved and progressive:

(Pages 13 – 14)
“The American and European dreams are, at their core, about two diametrically opposed ideas of freedom and security.  Americans hold a negative definition of what it means to be free and, thus, secure.  For us, freedom has long been associated with autonomy.  If one is autonomous, he or she is not dependent on others or vulnerable to circumstances outside of his or her control.  To be autonomous, one needs to be propertied.  The more wealth one amasses, the more independent one is in the world.  One is free by becoming self-reliant and an island unto oneself.  With wealth comes exclusivity, and with exclusivity comes security.

The new European Dream, however, is based on a different set of assumptions about what constitutes freedom and security.  [b]For Europeans, freedom is not found in autonomy but in embeddedness.  To be free is to have access to a myriad of interdependent relationships with others.[/b]  The more communities one has access to, the more options and choices one has for living a full and meaningful life.  With relationships comes inclusivity, and with inclusivity comes security.”

The popular phrase by ignorant Americans, “It’s a free country” is often used to justify doing whatever they want. Yet it’s one of the stupidest statements ever. When I was in junior high, kids who picked on me or bullied me would use the “It’s a free country” excuse to do whatever they wanted to me. It was totally moronic. There is no “free country” that lets the common person do whatever they want, especially to others. Every country has many laws, rules and regulations. It appalls me how easily brainwashed people are.

So what exactly are you “free” to do in America that you can’t do anywhere else? America doesn’t answer this important question. But I’ll take a crack at it. Let’s see…

You are free to work and make more money than you can in most countries, yeah, but the high cost of living offsets that. In fact, Americans are more in debt than those in any other country, and most Americans live paycheck to paycheck and are one paycheck away from being broke. Most do not own their own homes, but have mortgaged it, making themselves slaves to the bank. Is that freedom?

You have individual rights under the Constitution, yeah, but in most countries, especially Europe and Australia, human rights exist too. Most countries do not have the extreme human rights abuses shown in the US media. But let’s get real here. In any country, those in power seek to keep their power and control, not protect its citizens’ rights. It’s the same in the US. There can never be truly clean ethics as long as money can be used to influence and control things.

Americans like to boast that they have freedom of speech and that they can speak out against their own government and leaders legally, without getting arrested, whereas in all other countries, doing so will get you arrested or shot. But again, this is misleading. While it is true that you are legally allowed to speak out against the government in America, the truth is also that in most countries you are also allowed the same, (albeit a few fascist regimes) as long as you don’t actually DO anything to interfere with the government’s power and control.

The same applies in America. You can think what you want, engage in activism and protest, and write whatever you want (like I’m doing here), as long as you don’t actually get in the way of the elite networks and corporatocracy that run it. If you do, you will be subject to punishment or imprisonment, and if you are a popular leader capable of making big waves you can even be assassinated (e.g. Martin Luther King Jr, JFK, RFK).

So essentially, it’s the same thing. The only difference is that citizens of other nations can see the state of their freedom the way it really is, whereas Americans are under the delusion that they have a special status as “the freest nation on Earth”.

Sure, there are some countries like communist China or North Vietnam where dissidence is not tolerated and leads to incarceration, but these are extreme examples, and do NOT apply to most of the 200+ countries in the world. Besides, it is misleading to compare only with the worst examples out there, as the US media and Hollywood does. It would be more accurate to compare typical examples of most countries rather than the most extreme ones just to support your agenda, but America doesn’t do that obviously, for truth and reality are not its highest aim.

Either way, being able to legally speak out against the government does not make America the “freest nation on Earth” as its propagandists preach. Besides, there are a lot more “freedoms” important to life than just being able to speak out against the government, which is just one thing in the broad spectrum of life.

Australia and most of Europe, for example, have the same basic “freedoms” that Americans do, if not more. Yet they do not go around boasting that they are the “freest nation in the world” for all to follow, nor do they invade other countries under the false pretense of fighting for freedom. They are much more down to earth and real about it. It’s America that has these pumped up delusions which it tries to force onto the rest of the world. Americans seem to have an inferiority complex that makes them need to overstate and flaunt their patriotism and importance to the world. It’s a sad thing that indicates a lack of true wholeness inside the American psyche. As I’ve always said, America is a very fragmented and disconnected country, both psychologically and sociologically. You can see that in its citizens and the complete lack of human or social connection in its environment.

In reality, most of us conform to schedules and routines set by others, and submit to authority of some kind. As children we conform to school and submit to its authority, schedules, rules and workload. As adults, we submit to the same in the corporations that employ us. Most are not “free” to wake up and do whatever they want, especially not in an expensive workaholic country like America. That’s life. So what is “freedom” exactly? That’s the big existential question.

Since we are all under someone else’s control for the most part, in one way or another, there is no “true freedom”. Most of the world realizes this. It’s Americans that do not, instead living under the delusion that they are a free country and a free people, and that the rest of the world envies them and wishes they could immigrate there to attain “freedom”, despite evidence to the contrary.

So why then, do Americans believe this myth about their exclusivity to freedom when it has no basis in reality and makes no sense? Well I can only surmise that:

a) Most people are followers, not leaders, visionaries or independent thinkers. They are unable to think for themselves, and believe whatever they are told by establishment and authority. They conform to what they’ve been programmed and brainwashed with, and do not resist it. Even if their indoctrinations conflict with their everyday experiences and feelings, they will still hold to it, even if it’s self-contradictory or doesn’t add up.

b) Since America is a lonely country where one can only depend on oneself and is socially isolating and segregated as well, with social disconnectedness as the norm, people are going to naturally feel empty inside and need something to believe in, whether it’s a religion or blind patriotism in being the freest country in the world. Otherwise they have no motivation to feel proud and to continue becoming slaves and consumers of the system.

Ironically, though you are expected to be independent and autonomous in America, you are also expected to conform to the propaganda and religious beliefs of the “herd mentality” mentioned above. It’s a silent contradiction that America never bothers to resolve, cause obviously, America isn’t interested in intellectual debates over truth, but in profit, power, control and property.

c) The elite have a vested interest in promoting this illusion. It instills pride in the population, dumbs them down, keeps them ignorant about the rest of the world, and gets them to comply with US foreign policy, including military aggression overseas (tragically) and hostile takeover of foreign lands, under the guise of freedom and democracy.

This is especially the case if you are in the armed forces, in which case you need to be fully indoctrinated into believing that you are fighting for freedom and democracy, in order to instill absolutely loyalty in you, even if in reality you are on the side of evil engaging in an act of military aggression and hostile takeover for profit and power, bombing innnocent civilians in the process. Otherwise you wouldn’t follow orders to fight, risk your life or kill others if you knew the truth.

3) “In America you have freedom of speech, but if you question what you are told, such as the religious myths above, you will be deemed a heretic.”

In other words, “you have freedom of speech as long as you believe what you are told and don’t question it.”

This of course is ultimate hypocrisy and a direct contradiction that America cannot reconcile. There are many such contradictions. For example, Capitalism is said to be based on Christian values and ethics, yet it teaches that greed is good whereas Christian Scripture clearly teaches that greed is evil. But you are not supposed to question such things. So much for freedom of speech.

But then again, America sees freedom of speech as essentially harmless. Talking can’t hurt after all, unless of course you do something about it. And America knows that most people are passive. They may talk the dissident talk, but most will never do anything about it, and that’s the bottom line to the elite.

It’s a tricky form of mind control where you are deceived into thinking that you are free, when in reality you are mind controlled. The great intellectual American critic, Noam Chomsky, explained in his film Manufacturing Consent that since America does not have a totalitarian government militarily, the elite must control the masses’ thoughts instead. Therefore, they are engaging in a form of “totalitarian thought control” rather than by military rule. This means that they gain control of you one way or another.

4) “America starts starts wars and invades countries to protect freedom and democracy or spread it. It is your patriotic duty to support all wars America gets involved in, even if you disagree with them.”

You might think that brainwashing its citizens with myths about freedom and democracy is a harmless act that merely keeps the sheeple dumb and passive. But it goes beyond that.  These myths also serve the function of garnering public compliance when America gets involved in wars or invades other countries and occupies them, such as Iraq, killing innocent people for profit, greed and power.

So, it is your duty to support all US sponsored wars even if it is in the wrong or are “the bad guys” in the conflict. Anyone who doesn’t is condemned as “unpatriotic” or a heretic. Even celebrities and public officials are afraid to speak out against the Iraq War for fear of jeopardizing their position and careers. (so much for free speech) America uses a sick form of mind control that insinuates that if you are loyal to your country, you will support all its wars and invasions, even when it is in the wrong or on the side of evil. Otherwise, you are seen as a “traitor” and there is something wrong with you.

In essence, what America is saying is that loyalty and patriotism are above truth, justice and even life itself. It is willing to sacrifice innocent lives, including its own, and spread lies, for its diabolical purposes. This is plain wrong as well as evil. It is the total antithesis of freedom and justice. As a chilling reminder, Hitler also did the same.

In doing so, America again contradicts itself in claiming freedom of speech, while at the same time forbidding you to question what it preaches. In effect, America is saying “You are free, but you are required to agree with everything we say and do without question”, which is total hypocrisy.

The elite understand that they must hide their motives for getting involved in wars all the time. If the public was told the truth, that America’s wars are about power, greed, control and acquisition, the American people would not be willing to risk the life and limb of its troops for such purposes. No way. That’s why the sheeple have to be deceived. The elite behind the military industrial complex know that they are lying, but believe that they can get away with it because they are at the top of the pyramid, have a “God complex” and are “above the law”. Their souls are truly lost. Hopefully they will get their justly due karma.

This is especially the case for those serving in the armed forces. If you watch documentaries about the life of US troop stationed in Iraq or Naval personnnel stationed in ships off the coast of Iraq, you will see that everyday they are constantly drilled with lies and propaganda that they are there to fight for freedom and democracy, and that they are heros and liberators of Iraq. I pity these folks the most, for in reality they are sacrificing their life, limb and sanity for greed, profit and power, which no sane person would knowingly do. The military is a fascist hierarchical organization and its subjects have no choice but to conform to whatever they are told. Despite their honorable intentions, they are the epitome of gullibility. They’ve been transformed into non-thinking robots, which is a total degradation to their humanity.

The 2009 blockbuster film Avatar accurately portrays the motives of US military aggression. In the film, the US Marines are sent to plummage forests in an alien world to mine special minerals that sell for “20 million a kilo”. To do so, they had to move alien tribes off their lands in order to plunder their forest and cut down their main “tree of life”. The film is honest in revealing the motives of both sides. What was unusual about this film was that the US Marine Colonel was honest to his men and told them upfront that they were fighting to mine minerals for profit, not to spread “freedom and democracy”. And as you learn about the blue alien tribe, you understand the sacredness and beauty of their life, and the living energy of the forest. With this reveals, it becomes apparent that it would be wrong and inhumane to destroy it all in the name of corporate profit. With this revealed, the viewer’s conscience naturally sides with the blue alien tribes, who are the victims in the conflict, and realizes that the US military are the aggressors and “the bad guys” in the conflict. Thus the audience begins cheering when the tide of the battle turns and the US military starts getting wasted, since after all they are “the bad guys” in the wrong and on the side of evil. This film is marvelous for many reasons (such as its 3D feature), but it is groundbreaking in that it reveals that truth and life are ultimately more significant than patriotism and loyalty.

Similarly, the 1990 film Dances with Wolves starring Kevin Costner depicted the same accuracy in its portrayal of the conquest of the American frontier. When Dunbar (Costner) bonds with the Sioux tribe and begins to understand them and become one of them, the US Cavalry is revealed for what they really are, instruments of aggression and plunder who steal lands from Native Americans and commit atrocities against the innocent to achieve such ends. When the viewer understands this, he/she naturally sides with the plight of the Sioux tribe. So when Dunbar is rescued by his new Sioux brothers near the end, the audience cheers as the US Cavalry men are taken out, who by then are seen as “the bad guys”.

I applaud such films for their accurate portrayal of the motives of the US military, and for showing the light of truth and compassion over blind patriotism and loyalty.

Conclusion:

So you see, America’s religious myths about freedom and democracy, which it considers to be Gospel Truth and indoctrinates into its sheeple, is essentially baseless and not supported by facts or reality upon casual examination.  These myths are a religion, nothing more.  Many logical reasons and comparisons from ordinary examples and experiences have been presented here to debunk these myths.

America does not address the hard questions posed in this essay, nor the fact that so much of reality contradicts the propaganda and myths it spreads, but treats them as nonexistent. Instead, America merely throws its propaganda at you, knowing that most people will buy it and ignoring the few that don’t (unless they get in the way), then offers you a life of pursuing a career (aka becoming a corporate slave), consuming to help the economy, and dumbs you down with forms of mass entertainments. That’s all American life is. It’s not about truth or answering the hard questions. It’s about serving the profit system and corporatocracy. If you don’t like it, America doesn’t care, as long as you don’t get in the way.

What we can conlude then, based on all the above, is that “freedom” and “government by the people” are illusions.  They don’t need to actually exist.  The public merely needs to be given the illusion of freedom and democracy.  

But unfortunately for America and its controllers, truth tends to be self-evident and surfaces sooner or later.  Every time the public finds out that they’ve been lied to, their trust in government greatly decreases.  Without trust, foundations crumble, as we have been seeing in America recently.  That’s how great empires fall, such as Rome.  They collapse on the inside first.  We are already beginning to see that happening with the American Empire, as more and more of its citizens become disillusioned with it.  

In short, America is reaping the consequences of its self-destructive behaviors and ways, and in due time, the consequences of its deceptions and brainwashing on its own population will manifest as well, as truth eventually comes out.  That is, unless it decides to make amends and change its ways of exploiting others for profit, power and gain, and using lies and myths to cover for its crimes and wrongdoings.

But alas, people do not like to change their ways, especially if they are at the top of the pyramid, in which case they have a vested self-interest in maintaining the status quo.

The Roman Empire was also imperialistic, conquering lands belonging to others to expand its power and control through military aggression, and forcing others to submit to its totalitarian regime. The difference is that Rome was honest about its intentions and purposes, whereas America isn’t. Instead, America claims its imperialism is about promoting freedom and democracy. That’s why America doesn’t like to refer to itself as an “Empire” or use the world “Imperial” to describe itself, for such terms contradict its self-ascribed myth that it stands for freedom and democracy (but in reality of course, it stands for power, acquisition, control, dominance and greed).

It’s a pity that America doesn’t see the wisdom of one of its own children’s parables known as The Boy Who Cried Wolf, which teaches that consequences of lying is the destruction of one’s own credibility and mistrust from others. If America had heeded this simple parable, it wouldn’t be in the mess it is today. But of course, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. We’ve seen that throughout history, and America is no exception.

The game of America’s elite has always been to induce conformity in the population while at the same time maintaining the illusion of freedom and democracy. It’s a delicate game that is self-contradictory, which intelligent freethinkers can easily see through. As a result, the elite have had to find ways to weaken the public, dumb them down, and distract them. They’ve done this by segregating the populace, making its citizens paranoid of each other, emphasizing competitiveness, and distracting you with mindless mass entertainment and promoting a rampant consumer lifestyle.

But alas, they are playing a losing game and are losing their grip.  God only knows what they will resort to next.  Those in power do not give it up easily, and will not go down without a vicious fight.  Let’s hope that whatever changes, revolutions or global awakenings that are coming next will occur through a peaceful transformation.

I also pray that the public becomes informed, enlightened, intellectual and wise, so that history does not repeat itself (as it usually has in the past). As someone once said, “Those who do not learn history are condemned to repeat it.”  Hopefully, the free flowing of information on the internet will help make that possible.

Until then, if you would like to learn about how you can enjoy more freedoms and benefits abroad, and are ready to venture beyond the US Matrix to see the real world, come visit my website at http://www.HappierAbroad.com

Thanks for reading.

Sincerely,
Winston Wu

PS – If you wish to start down the path of becoming a freethinking intellectual, as we have, let me warn you first though, that it comes with consequences as well as benefits. (Though it may not be a conscious choice on your part, but rather a realization of what you already are) By becoming one, you will certainly have a richer inner life that others don’t have, and you will be able to see and know things at a depth and level that common people can’t. You will also attain the freedom to rise above the programming and conditioning of society, which the common person didn’t even know existed. You will be able to see things the way they really are, rather than how you were programmed to.

However, you will find it hard to fit into social groups and circles, for deep down an intellectual does not like to “conform” to something, for conformity is the antithesis of freethought. Also, you will find yourself looking down on common people, who are usually conformists and follow the pack, as ignorant sheeple do, so you will not really feel like you belong or fit in with them. To you, common people will seem like zombies. Thus it will be hard for you to remain modest, as pride and snobbiness may become part of your disposition.

You may find yourself often estranged from others, engaging them merely for superficial greetings or socializing. This means that you will find few people in life who can truly relate to you. Even the ignorant can sense vibes on an instinctual level, and they will sense that you are somehow “different” than them, vibrating at a different frequency. However, since like attracts like, you will certainly find others like you from time to time, through circumstances and coincidences. But you will not be connecting with the majority.

In addition, being able to see things that others can’t and know things that others don’t, you will find yourself annoyed at flaws and discrepancies that others don’t get hung up on. Sometimes “ignorance is bliss” after all. Others may perceive you as “anal retentive” for noticing imperfections that don’t matter to them.

An expat friend of mine, also a freethinker, had this to say on my Forum about the life of a freethinking intellectual:

“Why would the government want to properly educate the masses? They would lose their power in government cause then the average person would be able to see all their lies and fallacies. They realize a small percentage will break out of their matrix and they will either be ostracized from main society or they will be brought into the circle of power as one of their own.

To be able to break away from either of those labels takes a strong sense of purpose and some kind of divine intervention that was agreed upon before birth and intertwined into ones life. There are always people like this that break the mold, but society generally doesn’t realize their greatness until they have departed the Earth plane. Individuals that are well ahead of whatever is going on in society are the ones that keep society moving forward, but are often ridiculed in the process of trying to make others see the light. Most people do not have the capability to visualize what the future will bring, or they do it wrong cause they interpret the future using their current preconceived notions of reality.

A true visionary sets themselves apart from the mainstream and isn’t offended by brash comments upon their person.”

That being said, if you seek to find an intellectual majority or population, your best chance, in my experience, would be in Europe, where knowledge, culture, education and broad-mindedness seem to be at the highest levels.

Discuss this article in this forum thread:  http://www.happierabroad.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6881

To learn more about America’s dysfunction and how you can have a happier life overseas, visit my website at HappierAbroad.com

Winston Wu is an expat writer and founder of Happier Abroad, the most truthful International Dating site, and SCEPCOP, the first coalition debunking Media Pseudoskeptics.

Article from articlesbase.com

Related Freedom Of Religion Articles

RELIGION AND DEMOCRACY

RELIGION AND DEMOCRACY

 

I had written an article long time back about Religion and fanaticism and about how religious dogmas give rise to fanatics and fanaticism. While writing that article I came upon a thought about whether religion suppresses democracy or whether democracy suppresses religion. Either way the effect would be explosive as in both the cases the fundamental freedom of man is at stake. Therefore in this article I have decided to pen my thoughts regarding that very question, whether religion suppresses democracy or whether democracy suppresses religion. There is another very pertinent reason as why this debate should have a logical conclusion. What we are seeing in India along the Kashmir border, what we are seeing in Pakistan, Afghanistan We only point our fingers to one culprit to all the troubles that are been endured by the innocents in these places. Not only in these places but world over we have started blaming one religion for the troubles and the problems and the depleting economy of every nation in this earth. Have we ever tried to find out the proper reasons for the anomalies that are perpetrated world over? Is it not the responsibility of the elected government to set the things in its right perspective? Here in lies the crux of the issue, the crux of the debate that whether religion suppresses democracy? Or the other way round.

Let us then first start defining these two words. What do we understand by the word Democracy. DEMOCRACY: the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them majority rule: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

Democracy, which derives from the Greek word “demos,” or “people,” is defined, basically, as government in which the supreme power is vested in the people. In some forms, democracy can be exercised directly by the people; in large societies, it is by the people through their elected agents. Or, in the memorable phrase of President Abraham Lincoln, democracy is government “of the people, by the people, and for the people.” And now let us define the word Religion. It is very difficult to define religion because it encompasses not only one aspect of human social behavior but it encompasses the entire gamut of human social cultural intellectual behavior. Unlike democracy which just deals with the political behavior of human beings, religion can be seen as a theological, philosophical, anthropological, sociological, and psychological phenomenon of human kind. Again as said earlier to limit religion to only one of these categories is to miss its multifaceted nature and lose out on the complete definition.”  There are many interpretations of what defines a religion but not one that can be said to be the most accurate. A strong belief in a supernatural power or powers that control human destiny. An institution to express belief in a divine power. A belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the practices and institutions associated with such belief. The sum total of answers given to explain humankind’s relationship with the universe.

In dictionaries, religion is defined as “any specific system of belief, worship, or conduct that prescribes certain responses to the existence (or non-existence) and character of God.” Also, “a set of attitudes, beliefs, and practices pertaining to supernatural power.” This was just an attempt to define, religion but how did this aspect of human evolution come into being? If you go to the history you will find that religion was the second important thing that developed in the course of human evolution the evolution of social cultural human being, the physical evolution being complete by that time. the first thing that developed was the need to keep a group of the then hunters and gatherers together as a economical ,social coercive group functioning as one unit, a progressive unit therefore certain rules and regulations were imposed and developed –The first signs of democracy.  The development of religion came second out of fear of the natures fury, the time I am talking about is 40000 to 30000 years before present when the earth was going through various physical turmoil evidence are plenty in various cave arts all over the world which we call therianthropes. Actually the evolution of the brain is responsible for religion to take shape in the psyche of the human beings. The religious mind is one consequence of a brain that is large enough to formulate religious and philosophical ideas. During human evolution the hominid brain tripled in size, peaking 500,000 years ago. Much of the brain’s expansion took place in the neocortex. This part of the brain is involved in processing higher order cognitive functions that are necessary for human religiosity. The neocortex is responsible for self consciousness language and emotion. According to Dunbar’s theory, the relative neocortex size of any species correlates with the level of social complexity of the particular species. The neocortex size correlates with a number of social variables that include social group size and complexity of mating behaviors. In chimpanzees the neocortex occupies 50% of the brain, whereas in modern humans it occupies 80% of the brain.

Robin Dunbar argues that the critical event in the evolution of the neocortex took place at the speciation of archaic homo sapiens about 500 thousand years ago. His study indicates that only after the speciation event is the neocortex sufficiently large enough to process complex social phenomena such as language and religion. The study is based on a regression analysis of neocortex size plotted against a number of social behaviors of living and extinct hominids.

Having said a little about the origin of religion, how did democracy originate then. Was it the function again of the same developed neocortex? Or was it the fall out of the religious concept where by human beings devised a way to be harmonious and progressive, and economically viable social group? There was an article in the Deccan chronicle dated 8th August 2010 which I reproduce verbatim for my readers to get an insights as to how and why religion laid the foundation to democracy.  “The beauty of being a Hindu lies in your freedom to be who you want to be. Nobody can tell you what to do, or what not to do. There is no central authority, no single leader of the faith. No one can pass an order to excommunicate you, or like in some countries, pass a decree that orders your death by stoning for walking with a strange man.

We don’t appreciate our freedom because we can’t feel the plight of others who aren’t free. Many religions have a central authority with awesome power over the individual. They have a clear chain of command, from the lowliest local priest to the highest central leader. Hinduism somehow escaped from such central authority, and the Hindu has miraculously managed to hold on to his freedom through the ages. How did this happen?

Vedanta is the answer. When the writers of Vedanta emerged, around 1500 BC, they faced an organized religion of orthodox Hinduism. This was the post Vedic age, where ritualism was practiced, and the masses had no choice but to follow. It was a coercive atmosphere.

The writers of Vedanta rebelled against this authority and moved away from society into forests. This was how the ‘Aranyakas’ were written, literally meaning ‘writings from the forest’. These later paved the way for the Upanishads, and Vedanta eventually caught the imagination of the masses. It emerged triumphant, bearing with it the clear voice of personal freedom.

This democracy of religious thought, so intrinsic to Vedantic intelligence, sank into the mindset of every Indian. Most couldn’t fathom the deep wisdom it contained, but this much was very clear. They understood that faith was an expression of personal freedom, and one could believe at will.

That’s why Hinduism saw an explosion of Gods. There was a God for every need and every creed. If you wanted to build your muscles, you worshiped a God with fabulous muscles. If you wanted to pursue education, there was a Goddess of Learning. If it was wealth you were looking for, then you looked up to the Goddess of wealth — with gold coins coming out of her hands.

If you wanted to live happily as a family, you worshiped Gods who specially blessed families. When you grew old and faced oncoming death, you spent time in contemplating a God whose business it was to dissolve everything — from an individual to the entire Universe.

Everywhere, divinity appeared in the manner and form you wanted it to appear, and when its use was over, you quietly discarded that form of divinity and looked at new forms of the divine that was currently of use to you. ‘Yad Bhavam, tad Bhavati’… what you choose to believe becomes your personal truth, and freedom to believe is always more important than belief itself.

Behind all this — was the silent Vedantic wisdom that Gods are but figments of human imagination. As the Kena Upanishad says, “Brahma ha devebhyo vijigye…” — All Gods are mere subjects of the Self. It implies that it is far better that God serves Man than Men serve God. Because Men never really serve God — they only obey the dictates of a religious head who speaks for that God, who can turn them into slaves in God’s name.

Hindus have therefore never tried to convert anyone. Never waged war in the name of religion. The average Hindu happily makes Gods serve him as per his needs. He discards Gods when he has no use for them. And new Gods emerge all the time — in response to market needs. In this tumult, no central authority could survive. No single prophet could emerge and hold sway, no chain of command could be established.

Vedanta had injected an organized chaos into Hinduism, and that’s the way it has been from the last thirty five centuries. Vedanta is also responsible, by default, for sustaining democracy. When the British left India, it was assumed that the nation would soon break up. Nothing of that kind has happened.

The pundits of doom forgot that the Indian had been used to religious freedom from thousands of years. When he got political freedom, he grabbed it naturally. After all, when you can discard Gods why can’t you discard leaders?

Leaders like Gods are completely expendable to the Indian mindset. They are tolerated as long as they serve the people, and are replaced when needs change. It’s the triumph of people over their leaders, and in this tumult, no dictator can ever take over and rule us. Strange how the thoughts of a few men living in forests, thirty five centuries ago, can echo inside the heart of every Indian. That’s a tribute to the resurgent power of India, and the fearlessness of its free thinking people.”

I am not preaching Hinduism here and that is not what this article is all about. What this article has basically brought forward is the freedom that the religion gives to human beings. To maintain these freedom and to enhance the other freedoms like that of speech, freedom of movement, freedom of expression and thought, right to freedom of religion and right against exploitation it is the religion that gives the first impetus and human beings then models the same in a larger context when it comes to the question of ruling or governing a state. That is precisely the reason why the Indian constitution says that it is a sovereign socialist republic by virtue of which every citizen or every human being residing in India has a right to choose and preach his religion peacefully and the state will not interfere in anyway in the expression and practice of religion. Politics and religion are kept separate and politics does not come in the way of religion or vice versa.

Hinduism is not the only religion where democracy took shape through religion. Democracy is not new to Islam. The foundation of the first government in the history of Islam was laid on democracy. “That Muslims attach great significance to their organization as a political community can be seen in the fact that their calendar is dated neither from the birth nor the death of the Prophet, but from the establishment of the first Muslim policy in the city-state of Madinah in 622. Before Madinah was founded, the Arabs had no state to “establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.” (Ahmad, 2003)

There are certain important points to remember as one searches democracy in the history of Islam. The concept of democracy is present in the Qur’an as the Qur’an covers everyday life, including the political structure. Since Islam is a way of life, democracy fits in well with it – freedom of speech, religion, equality, are the rights of the people as long as they are well balanced.

Prophet Muhammad applied democratic principles in the establishment of the Muslim community 1500 years ago. The two major principles of democracy practiced during this time were: The concept of Bay’ah (voting) where the Qur’an says that the “ruler cannot rule without the consent of the people.” For example, Abu Bakr was the first elected Khalifa. He was democratically elected in the same way the earlier U.S. president George Washington was elected. A large number of Sahaba (companions of the prophet) would gather in the Saqifa where different parties would put forward different nominations open for debate and then would pick out a single nominee like the caucuses in the different parties in a constitutional democracy. At the time of Abu Bakr there were not two parties but three, and each party came up with their own nomination (Al Muhajeroon with candidate Abu Baker; Alansar with Saad bin Ubada; and Ali Bin Abi Talib and Abdullah Ibn Alzubir in a mixture of Muhajeroon and Ansar as the third party). After the individual caucuses the three major groups met in the Saqifa of Banu Saeda and agreed on Abu Bakr after much heated debates. Abu Bakr finally emerged as the nominee and he was presented to the masses as the candidate for them to make a final vote. In other words Abu Bakr did not become the Khalifa until the masses gave him the Biya, similar to the Democratic and Republican parties. Thus, “Abu Bakr’s election as the first caliph demonstrates the acceptability of the Electoral College as a method of electing the head of state.” (Ahmad, 2003)

The concept of the Shura (consultation) is very similar to the democratic principle of debate and agreement. It is the community as a whole, not an individual that owns or exercises power. In a chapter on Al-Shura the Qur’an describes Muslim societies as one in which individuals manage their affairs through consultation. Shura is similar to direct democracy and is considered as a personal duty, which no on can perform on behalf of another. Shura is obligatory on Muslims as the five daily prayers are; like prayers Muslims are urged to practice shura in their daily work, family lives, and community affairs. Again we see that religion actually helped states to formulate a well devised formula to govern a state flawlessly without any prejudice whatsoever as it (democracy) became the wish of the people, for the people. So Abraham Lincoln was not wrong when he said the famous words. “By the people, For the people, Of the people”

Going back to Hinduism again Hindu scriptures, Vedas, are a collection of teachings from over many thousand years. Hinduism allows followers to interpret scriptures according to the current times. Dogmatic interpretation and its forceful execution are not a part of Hinduism, as it has been with Islam and Christianity.  These religions often ignore the basic teachings of their founders.  Hinduism does not seek converts.  No forceful or violent conversion, no religious wars with Christians, Jews, Jains, Sikhs, Buddhists,

You can become Hindu by your own free will by accepting Bhagavad-Gita, essence of Vedas spoken by Lord Krishna as a final authority. The mythology of Purana or the great epics Ramayana or Mahabharata explain the Vedas to common people in a simple way. Numerous sects of Hinduism co-exist peacefully under the supreme guidance from the Vedas.  Hinduism offers lots of freedom to operate. An individual decides his Guru, and follows him or her. When many devotees come together a sect is formed.  Like democracy, the people select a leader. Sects come and go like political parties in a dynamic democracy. Often, those of other faiths portray Hinduism as a religion of confusion. It is like communist or a dictator might consider democracy as a confused state where the news media, congressmen, senators, the president and scholars challenges each other dramatically and sometimes unreasonably. Like American democracy, where challenging a President or burning a flag is tolerated – Hinduism tolerates challenges. Contrast to Hinduism, Christianity and Islam offer very limited freedom and tolerance for other faiths.

According to Hinduism, there are different paths to reach God, just like there are many ways to reach the top of the mountain. As you go higher, differences between them are reduced. Anyone who believes that his is the only way to reach God is full of ignorance just like a frog in a well unable to comprehend the outside world. Bhagavad-Gita suggests the following Yogas to reach God:  Knowledge, Devotion, Meditation, and Karma. Karma Yoga is pure selfless service. Missionary service is not Karma Yoga, as missionaries hope to convert people to their faith and thus expand their power base to reestablish domination of the church which will ultimately curtail democracy.

Vedas means knowledge. It is not only religious rituals with chanting of hymns, but it includes philosophy, astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and grammar. When philosophy is the origin of religion, it permits freedom of speech and thought, and acknowledges Atheism. Just like democracy, Hinduism accepts Atheists as equal citizens. About 2300 years ago India peacefully became predominantly Buddhist during the Maurya Empire. During that period, Takshila University was the center of learning Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism and Atheism.  Also, Nalanda University was formed 2000 years ago with its 10,000 students and 1500 teachers. In the 8th century Hindu Guru Shankracharya debated one to one Hindu, Jain, Buddhist and Atheist women and men gurus who upon defeat accepted his synthesis of Vedic metaphysics philosophy and India became again predominantly Hindu.

So is religion compatible with democracy? Yes, if you practice your religion or beliefs as you see fit without imposition on the lives of other people. This teaches the value of democracy to all

Now If we remember long time back when Afghanistan was under Russian regime during the cold war period and America desperately wanted to have a base in Pakistan, a plan was set in motion to destabilize the Russians in Afghanistan. Bin laden was reared by the Americans to bring down the Russians and for that he was given a free hand and funds were plenty available at the whims and fancy of Bin laden. Today we have a frankestin at our door step and we are blaming the religion for it?? The people at power in America Afghanistan and Pakistan, the democratically elected leaders at the helms of affair are to be blamed for the emergence of groups and organizations like Al Qaeda . It is their policies and politics that has created a monster and now we are all blaming each other for its existence. Is religion to be blamed here?? What is happening in India? Corrupt politicians create divide between the two religions namely the Hindus and the Muslim only to gather and garner the numbers ( votes ) mathematics to win an election and by that way they can stay in power and keep continuing to be corrupt. Democracy here is the mathematics of number, majority. So much so that these corrupt bands of politicians even divide the society on the basis of caste system which was not in the first place a part of religion. National issues have long taken back seat in Indian politics and the politicians today are busy appeasing and pleasing a section of the population based on religion or caste just to get elected and to be in the driving seat so that they can keep on becoming more and more corrupt. Again we see that it is democracy which is actually killing the religion.

People everywhere are today blaming the Islam religion and particularly the Muslims for all the destability that the world is facing today. In many places in India Muslims have started keeping a Hindu name. Muslims do not get visas, Muslims do not get jobs. Muslims feel isolated and this feeling is universal everywhere. Question is Why should the religion and the followers of this religion be punished for something which it has never perpetrated?? Have we brought the perpetrators to justice?? Did the corrupt, self-centered, criminal politician get the boot? No because it is again the mathematics of number the mathematics of majority, the mathematics of Democracy that has suppressed the religion.

As I had mentioned in one of my earlier article that once Sri ramkrishna Paramhansa was asked that if god is one and only one then why do we need religion or what is necessity for religion. Ramkrishna beautifully answered the question. He said that it is a top of the mountain where one has to reach and there are various route around the mountain that one has to take so that he can reach the top. Now if the person who is already on one route making his way to the top starts thinking that the route he is on is a tough one and he needs to change and he comes down and takes another route and he keeps doing this frequently, he will never be able to reach the top. So a route is a must and the route is the religion And all route leads to the top of the mountain so all religion leads to the same top the only one.  Therefore every religion preaches the basic concept of democracy, every religion preaches that love thy neighbor, every religion preaches tolerance, every religion preaches humility, and above all every religion preaches love. It is the rulers, politicians, the elected representatives, who malign the religion create divide between them and loot the moolah at the expense of the electorate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The author has a masters degree in anthropology from Kolkata university

Article from articlesbase.com

Clyde W. Summers Dies at 91; Advocated Democracy in Labor Unions

Clyde W. Summers Dies at 91; Advocated Democracy in Labor Unions
The law professor played a role in writing the 1959 federal law that guaranteed democratic rights to union members.

Read more on New York Times