MaxedOutMama
Monday, June 27, 2005
True Grit On The Castle Coalition
Ilona at True Grit suggests pressing your local government to agree not to take private property for the purpose of handing it over to some private entity for private use. It doesn't really seem too much to ask, does it? I agree with her, by the way - in the vast majority of the cases, this is going to be all about greed, and not the general welfare:
Ilona linked to Dynamist Blog, who has some good advice. The Castle Coalition probably is a good place to start your efforts, and you had better start them now. You will not get a receptive hearing in the halls of government. And do not be mistaken - for the supporters of this decision, who are greatly concentrated among the ranks of the legal and the legislative class, plus their hangers-on, this decision is all about preserving government power. See this thread on DU. It begins, in part:
The only way the government can continue on its present path is to seize a great deal of property. You don't have to believe me. Go read the CBO report, or the FDIC forecasts. Really read them. My grandfather got out of Germany ahead of the Nazis, and I was raised to look for the same signs, and here they are. World War II was begun in the 1930's, when Germany's economy was set on an unsustainable path - and it is that same path we ourselves are treading.
The difference between a fascist and a communist state is the flip of a coin, because they are two faces on the same coin. In order to keep from being hammered into that coin you must preserve rights to private property, because only those rights really constrains the power of the state. A hungry man can't say no to state coercion. I'm amazed at the tunnel vision of so many bloggers, who are focusing on the inevitable local abuses while the real problem will be the federal government. Nor is the definition of "property" in the Fifth Amendment restricted to real estate. The Supreme Court of the United States just announced that any governmental body can seize your assets providing it provides just compensation. (Which is whatever the government thinks it is, especially when you don't have the assets any more with which to fight in court.) Then the government can give them to whoever it wants to for a "public purpose", which might include a plan for economic development, not that anyone will be required to show that the plan is likely to succeed.
We will light a backfire to reverse this, or we will end up profoundly unfree. There is no middle course.
Until citizens are given back their property rights, force your local government to agree not to abuse the carte blanche that the Supreme Court has given the never ending money pit of greed within the development housing interests and within the tax happy local schools which feed upon the same carcass of our rights to our homes.Money is seductive, and the temptations here are so vast that there will be great abuse. So getting mad is fine, and we must preserve an intense determination to redress the matter on the federal level, but first we'd better protect our butts at home. First you guard your rear, then you advance.
Ilona linked to Dynamist Blog, who has some good advice. The Castle Coalition probably is a good place to start your efforts, and you had better start them now. You will not get a receptive hearing in the halls of government. And do not be mistaken - for the supporters of this decision, who are greatly concentrated among the ranks of the legal and the legislative class, plus their hangers-on, this decision is all about preserving government power. See this thread on DU. It begins, in part:
The Kelo case pitted elected government against property, and elected government won. Whom would a victory for property have helped more, big corporations or ordinary working people?And one of the replies:
Liberal opponents of the decision are siding with Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, and O'Connor. Might the five Justices in the majority know something very important that's a mystery to most Liberals?
Yes.
Thank you for posting this.And yet another:
We need to eliminate corporate control over government decisions, not the regulatory power of government.
This is about property redistribution.The Communists and statists among us are drooling over Kelo. The federal government is the place where they most need this power, and it is there that it must finally be blocked. People think it can't happen, but it can and it will. The crash that will first be felt in about a decade will be historic, because our federal government financing is running straight into a brick wall. Government workers are the largest single group among us, and those unions wield a disproportionate amount of political power. They will ardently support whatever needs to be done to protect themselves and their families. This is going to be a knock-down, drag-out fight to the finish, because it is the pensions and the security of those people that is really threatened.
If America is to be controlled by corporations, then yes, of course we should be destroying the governments power to regulate everything because the government isnt legitimate, but that is an entirely seperate issue.
The constitution assumes that we have a legitimate government, and thus as long as due process and compensation are followed that government can sieze property. You are completely fabricating the rule that government cannot use this power to take land and redistribute it. And seriously, it is the right that wants the power of government to redistribute property gone, not the left.
The only way the government can continue on its present path is to seize a great deal of property. You don't have to believe me. Go read the CBO report, or the FDIC forecasts. Really read them. My grandfather got out of Germany ahead of the Nazis, and I was raised to look for the same signs, and here they are. World War II was begun in the 1930's, when Germany's economy was set on an unsustainable path - and it is that same path we ourselves are treading.
The difference between a fascist and a communist state is the flip of a coin, because they are two faces on the same coin. In order to keep from being hammered into that coin you must preserve rights to private property, because only those rights really constrains the power of the state. A hungry man can't say no to state coercion. I'm amazed at the tunnel vision of so many bloggers, who are focusing on the inevitable local abuses while the real problem will be the federal government. Nor is the definition of "property" in the Fifth Amendment restricted to real estate. The Supreme Court of the United States just announced that any governmental body can seize your assets providing it provides just compensation. (Which is whatever the government thinks it is, especially when you don't have the assets any more with which to fight in court.) Then the government can give them to whoever it wants to for a "public purpose", which might include a plan for economic development, not that anyone will be required to show that the plan is likely to succeed.
We will light a backfire to reverse this, or we will end up profoundly unfree. There is no middle course.
Comments:
<< Home
Thanks for spreading the word. As events in Texas show, government is wasting no time ( we knew they wouldn't). And if asking around is any indication lots of Americans are not even aware of what happened this week, with it not getting lots of press play yet.
This seems one for the blogosphere -born for such a time as this, I'd say. Forgive me, ppls, for hijacking the saying...but really!
Post a Comment
This seems one for the blogosphere -born for such a time as this, I'd say. Forgive me, ppls, for hijacking the saying...but really!
# posted by 
: 1:37 PM
: 1:37 PM << Home
