In “The end of America” thread I mentioned the American Freedom Campaign, which I joined. They recently made me aware of the new legislation above.
On October 15, 2007, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) introduced the American Freedom Agenda Act of 2007 (H.R. 3835). This important piece of legislation would reverse many of the Constitutional abuses that have occurred over the past six years.
In the name of the “war on terror,” the Bush Administration and Congress have repeatedly abandoned Constitutional principles at the expense of civil liberties and human rights. If we allow this to continue, we may end up living in a nation that reflects the worst nightmare of our Founders. They designed the Constitution specifically to protect our rights against a tyrannical government. Even in times of crisis, we must be true to their vision.
That’s why I just visited the American Freedom Campaign and took action by sending an e-mail urging my U.S representative to co-sponsor this legislation. The pre-written e-mail included a short description of the bill, along with a reminder about the fact that all members of Congress take an oath to “support and defend the Constitution.”
Your representative needs to hear from as many constituents as possible about this. Please take a moment and e-mail your representative today. Follow this link to take action. Thanks so much for joining me in this effort.
You can read the text of the bill through a link at the American Freedom Campaign’s home page, linked above.
And for those of us who don’t live in America? And for those who live in countries where the US has undermined democratic freedom to suit their national interest for decades?
The American political issues I promote here are those that would restore democratic freedom not onto to Americans but to its neighbors abroad. This bill will restore rights of those accused of terrorism, e.g., Section 3(d):
Any individual detained as an enemy combatant by the United States shall be entitled to petition for a writ of habeas corpus under section 2241 of title 28, United States Code.
Naomi Wolf blogged about this in yesterday’s Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/naomi-wolf/finally-action-ron-pau_b_69042.html
And what about unwillingness to participate with international organisations like the UN and the ICC (International Criminal Court) or multilateral treaties like the Kyoto treaty?
Where in the case of the ICC the Congress gave the president permission to invade the Netherlands in case the ICC detaines an american soldier. See “the Hague Invasion Act”:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Servicemembers%27_Protection_Act
“It authorizes the President to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any [US or allied personnel] being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Courtâ€Â. This has led opponents of the act to call it The Hague Invasion Act.”
Cynical detail is that the Netherlands hosted the founding fathers of the US, the pilgrims, before they sailed off to the US:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrim_Fathers
But mainly it shows how far the US has driven away from the concept of sovereignity in the case of other countries as also is shown in their application of the very tricky theory of the preemptive strike. Of course not for itself, as shown in their unwillingness to give away any power to international governmental organisations.
I’m with you Marko and Ray on how far astray American has gone. So why are you resistant when the more sane Americans start to try to remedy the situation, like with this Bill? I’m also fairly sure that ordinary Americans are speaking up to their Senators, representatives and through the vote to change what our country has become in the hands of fascists. That’s why Bills such as these, as is the coming Presidential election, important not only for us Americans but for our international policies as well. Like it or not, and by your own admission, our politics will have an effect on the entire globe.
I’m not resistant and I encourage it. But I am somewhat amused that Americans are again being self-centered and worrying about their personal freedom, yet they remained somewhat subdued when the US promoted fascism in other countries. But I guess my main concern is that I see this blog (as an integral thingy) to have a global focus. So I worry about it being used to promote (no matter how worthy) parochial issues. The abuse of democratic rights is an issue in other countries too you know. Britain and Australia have similar concerns and similar initiatives.
Edward, just remember that not everyone who reads this blog is an American citizen and has no say on domestic political issues. Giving links to join domestic political movements is somewhat redundant.
I’d rather we kept this blog free of domestic politics and discussed the global trends in the wake of the war against terrorism.
I must disagree with you Ray on a couple of points. I don’t think that the Act I reference is merely parochial in that it affects the way we conduct international relations. And I don’t think that just because as issue is parochial (if it were) that it isn’t relevant It might just be the way a global trend is manifesting locally. For example, this issue of the American government going fascist is not particular to us but one that is happening globally, with conservatives making inroads in many foreign governments, from Australia to the Netherlands. So by comparing notes on our particular, local governments we can discern such global patterns and each take respective local action. For example, don’t you think that if the American Act is passed that it won’t have a postivie effect on initiating other such local political initiatives in other countries? I for one would love to hear how this issue is manifesting in other countries and the local initiatives they are taking to remedy it. Australia? England? Netherlands?
I’ve been thinking about my reaction. Yes, you are right – if we make the issue broader. In Australia we are about to have a federal election in which it is likely that the conservative government will loose. There have been some high profile cases in which the authorities have gone too far (ie Mohammed Hanif). Yes, people are uncomfortable with this, but in the end all they are concerned with is their own backyard and their personal wealth.
On a global level I’m afraid that many people want Americans to suffer the same fate that they have willingly allowed others to suffer. This is not a positive emotion, it is schaudenfraud, the idea that Americans are getting what they deserve. In fact many want America to collapse because they they do not want America to have the power it does. There are moments where I am tempted to this view, the only thing pulls me back is that there is no better alternative. A world where America collapses is a world where China would become more dominant, and it is on all fronts, much worse.
On another front. I am somewhat aware of Ron Paul. When I visited the US in 2002 I was the guest of an I-I member who belonged to Paul’s libertarian faction within the Republican party. I visited Paul’s office (but did meet Paul) and attended a libertarian faction meeting (an odd experience). I am sceptical about Paul and the libertarian faction. What has been Paul’s voting record on US imperialism?
The thing is that I doubt that the new wave of global democratization will come from within the US. By and large Americans suffer excessive narcissism, even amongst progressives. I don’t think America is as important or as influential as Americans think it is. It likes to think it is the moral leader of the world, but many laugh at it. The world pays attention because in the end the US is a bully.
Marko is right. For decades the US has exempted itself from just about every global initiative. And the world will never forget that America voted for an idiot twice. Why? Many suspect its because the average American is stupid and that Bush is a perfect reflection. Being the most powerful nation on the earth carries a responsibility – a responsibility it has arrogantly ignored and the average voter rejects. Americans remain woefully ignorant of other countries.
Of course there are highly educated Americans, and some really good progressive movements have come out of the US, but by and large they have been behind the pulse. I said in the post attacking the WIE issue on women that the first constituency to give full suffrage to women (including the right to hold office, not just vote) was South Australia in 1894, 26 years before the US. (In fact SA had given limited voting rights to women in 1861).
The other thing is that there is quite a wide gap of understanding between how Americans see their country and how the rest of the world sees it. American children are brainwashed to think the US is the world leader in democracy. It isn’t and never was. Sure, it had some influence, but the propaganda just doesn’t match the facts. It can be argued that the main driver of America is material greed, not democratic idealism. All the talk about democracy has really been about the freedom of Americans to exploit the world and get rich. The American dream is about getting rich. So it is not surprising that given a choice between democracy and wealth, most Americans will sell their democratic freedoms for an indulgent lifestyle.
Ask yourself what the American Dream is really all about? Who is more famous? Paris Hilton or Al Gore?
But it seems to many outside the US that all the self-posturing about freedom is empty rhetoric. You worry about Bush, but America has been down this road before. Heard of McCarthy? And for decade upon decade Black Americans lived in a fascist state in the south. So Edward, what’s so new? Texas is one of the places on the earth that has a high capital punishment rate. Recently an inmate was executed because a judge refused to keep the court open after five to hear his appeal. This sounds like third world justice to people outside the US.
So what I’m saying is that your plight is not new. When their wealth and power is threatened Americans forget democracy.
Frankly, I’m more interested in the growth of democracy in China.
But what will overshadow all of this is environmental collapse and the decline of natural resources. Either we will change our ways, or we will resist change and try to hold onto all our goodies. Meanwhile the US pumps out crap popular culture. The thing that indicates how sick the US is, is that Black musicians promote a hyper-indulgent lifestyle, they try to out-bling white America. It seems they know what the American Dream is really all about – bling.
IOW, the problem is much, much deeper and until that deeper problem is addressed the US will continue to surrender human rights and dignity (mostly of others) for bling. Yes, the US is the moral leader in promoting materialism.
I understand your cynicism about the general populace Ray, focused on their own lives and backyard. Yet the same populace, with the vote, is about to remove your conservative government per your post. Americans did the same with the mid-term electiion, replacing many conservatives with liberals. And it’s likely we’ll do the same with the Executive in 08. And in large measure it’s because such administrations went too far into the general populace’s backyard, destroying their personal freedoms and economies so that they couldn’t buy the toys the used to. I don’t disagree with your dim American view but I want to do what I can to change my country.
I think that political action by the general pubic though is the only remedy to governmental abuse. And I, as an involved citizen, must motive people to action through the only power they have, by voting and by contacting their representatives. And the vast majority of such action is of parochial concern. Remember of the old adage: think globally and act locally. It is only by action on the local level–here, there, anywhere–that we can actually effect change in these global issues. So that I take the initiative to motivate Americans to take an easy action–write and email to their representative–might have a profound effect on whether this Bill gets passed and restores rights to everyone globally.
So I think using this forum to present such local political action is necessary. And not just for America but for Australia or whereever. So I encourage anyone who has such a global issue in need of local political action to use this forum to make your constituents aware of it and motivate them to take action. Such action is what is lacking in our typical, cozy, lazy lives yet many of us are one step away from doing something if we only knew how. So let’s tell them how and make it easy for them to do it. You representative is literally just one click or phone call away.
I don’t worry about giving our Founders nightmares [I mean, THEY'RE DEAD; the country IS OURS, NOW]. I don’t think that our liberties are all that much endangered. And I understand fully why America is reluctant to cooperate with those cockamamie international institutions.
Bush was elected twice because our system of electing presidents is terrible and Bush’s opponents were abysmal campaigners.
The thing we need is a sustainable economy for a small planet. We have no means to deal with global warming or the trade and budget deficits, a burgeoning world population and all else that has us on a runaway train heading toward a fifty-foot thick brickwall. We don’t have a political system that encourages grown-ups to lead us.
Time is up for most of this whining. We need to put a fat tax on gasoline and explain why that’s necessary. We need to move New Orleans inland. We need to end the blatent bribing of politicians by K Street. We need to plant trees and save water and raise cafe standard til it really hurts and stop people from smoking and eating crap.
There simply isn’t time any more for the luxury of many libertarian ideas, or conservative ideas or progressive ideas. We need to pull ourselves out of the mud by focussing on making human life on this small planet sustainable.
I find it a little odd that a member of the U.S. congress has authored a bill, American Agenda Freedom Act (2007) that if passed would enforce provisions of the constitution when the constitution is able to enforce itself. That is a large part of what the federal court system is about. That is what the office of the U.S. Attorney General is about. That is, in smaller part, what the office of each of the 50 states’ attorneys general is about. And it is what any citizen who has standing to seek redress can do. I don’t find it odd however that the authoring Congressman is running for the office of U.S. President–the bill makes for such a good marketing tool. Further it is not at all odd that the authoring Congressman/Candidate is a Libertarian, a party with the rather quixotic philosophy that governmental laws can be made that will make the law enforcer–the government–go away. After watching this improbable collection of seemingly well intentioned folks chase their collectively idealistic tale for several decades I have to conclude that Libertarians are essentially anarchists who don’t have enough courage or moral conviction to disobey the law, so instead they want to make it. Theirs, it appears, is the homeopathic modality for reformation politics at least, if not for anarchy itself.
Over the course of the 20-25 years I spent in almost daily contact (as one outside the circle) with governmental law making and law enforcement, it became clear to me that if one follows the mitochondrial DNA of any government it can be traced back to a handful of ancient protection rackets and there isn’t one that has transcended those roots. No matter how many constitutional provisions are designed to dress it in glowing white robes, or how many laws are passed to reaffirm the sanctity of these vestments, come nut cutting time, it is still just a plain old protection racket. So I would not hold out much hope for the effectiveness of Ron Paul’s bill if it makes it to law, any more than I would hold hope for any other law. The Hyperactive Process Theory of Legislation toward which I lean says law, from the beginning, is the feckless attempt to regulate the future by regulating reconstructions of the past. The eternal moment known as now is eternal chaos. (Gracias a dios.) The educated middle class in the U.S., that earnest sector that props up all regimes by its “habit of obedience,” has never quite snapped to that, and so helped to evolve their country into one of the most law-ridden in the world.(There are probably a handful of laws on the books right now that would make Congressman Paul’s bill totally redundant.) I was lucky enough to spend most of my life in parts of the U.S. where law enforcement is rather on the slight side and now live in another country where there is even less. This context gives one the perspective from where most U.S. citizens can be seen acting as if they believe that those activities not explicitly allowed by law are implicitly prohibited…Orwell’s hell. This is what will allow the bill to become law by the action of the candidates and will also allow it to slip into oblivion through the actions of those who don’t buy the propaganda.
But it makes for a good campaign. A good campaign always makes the home folks feel rather alive where they might not otherwise–thus it is worthy of everyone’s earnest support.
Tom says:
“I don’t worry about giving our Founders nightmares [I mean, THEY’RE DEAD; the country IS OURS, NOW]. I don’t think that our liberties are all that much endangered.”
One thing every country needs to do is learning from their own history. So I think your remarks about your Founders are not the best way to deal with them.
Your President started a major war in the Middle East based on lies he knew were lies, see f.i. from Wikipedia on Plamegate: “After the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, Wilson wrote a series of op-eds (opinion-editorials) questioning the war’s factual basis (See “Bibliography” in The Politics of Truth). In one of these op-eds published in the New York Times on July 6, 2003, Wilson argues that, in the State of the Union Address, President George W. Bush misrepresented intelligence leading up to the invasion and thus misleadingly suggested that the Iraqi regime sought uranium to manufacture nuclear weapons.[3]“.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame_affair
And Bush spies on his own citizens in violation of the Constitution:
See http://www.aclu.org/safefree/nsaspying/index.html
I think these are pretty strong arguments to look at the liberties of the citizens and the legal attitude of Bush. A President that presents lies as reasons for going into war or thinks that the Constitution is for everybody else but not for him doesn’t really seem to care about civil rights.
“Bush was elected twice because our system of electing presidents is terrible and Bush’s opponents were abysmal campaigners.”
I agree that the district system that can elect a President who has less votes then the loser should be replaced by a majority vote winner. But both Gore and Kerry were descent and capable campaigners who were the victim of character assassination by Bush and Rove. The fact that the slander and lies of the latter were not met by Gore and Kerry in an appropriate way to get them elected says more about the US electorate who apparently cannot detect the good guy from the bad guy.
“And I understand fully why America is reluctant to cooperate with those cockamamie international institutions.”
In the rest of your post you argue about the nessecity to work on the environment, justice, burgeoning world population etc. All these problems are (also) international problems that can only be tackled structurally in an international way. This means working through international institutions and treaties, which the US structurally sabotages. And of course these institutions have their downsides. The UN has corruption problems, but so does the US Congress. Most international institutions are still young and need to develop more. I think that the main reason the US obstructs them is because it does not want to give away any sovereignity or power. But don’t you agree with me that a World Government and a World Justice Institution is the next (bigger) holon compared to the situation now?
“There simply isn’t time any more for the luxury of many libertarian ideas, or conservative ideas or progressive ideas.”
I would say that this is one of the main reasons behind the problems of the US and its incapable government. A ‘just do it’ mentality combined with a deep anti-intellectualism. And a country that elects a president because he has an image of a doer, not a thinker. Well, Iraq is a very good example of the mess you get when you don’t think about what your doing; no strategical thinking beforehand, no plan on what to do when you ‘own’ the country etc. If you think to know about libertarian, conservative or progressive ideas are a luxury when you need to solve very complex situations like the environment, economy and justice then you apparantly don’t understand that politics are a very basic ingredient in solving these problems.
Tom says:
“There simply isn’t time any more for the luxury of many libertarian ideas, or conservative ideas or progressive ideas. We need to pull ourselves out of the mud by focussing on making human life on this small planet sustainable.”
I totally agree! But how tro get this happening? There is a huge amount of entrenched vested interests, entrenched corruption, and so on Here in Australia the Gunns pulp mill was steamrolled through and approved in Tasmania, despite popular opposition and a looming election. It was supported by both major parties. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Bay_Pulp_Mill This is typical of where the problem lies.
David Korten talks about a global paradiogm shift, the Great Turning, in a book of the same name
Marko said:
“But don’t you agree with me that a World Government and a World Justice Institution is the next (bigger) holon compared to the situation now?”
Steve McIntosh presents an interesting case for integral world federation in his book Integral Consciousness (i think also in some essays on Integral World). See Edward’s comment and links http://www.openintegral.net/blog/?p=249#comments
This of course requires a collective evolution of consciousness to teh “integral” level (however that might be defined)
If you are concerned about American imperialism, Ron Paul is your man. As president and “Commander-in-chief of the military, not the people”, he says he would wind back military presence not just in Iraq, but throughout the Middle East and the world. He has publically stated that he doesn’t think terrorists are motivated to attack the US because of “freedoms”, but because of the US bases on their soil. He has even spoken about the need to apologise to Iran for the whole deal with the Shah!
As an under 30 year old Aussie, I can’t claim to know much about politics. But having moved from my disillusionment with Ken Wilber due to what I interpret as an inability to let go of control and allow people grow, think and development as they must (surely a classic Green Shadow), then going on to a deeper study of my Chinese heritage in Daoism and Confucianism, I have grown more and more “libertarian” and less sympathetic to the “Left” as I go.
I am beginning to understand the wisdom of the non-interventionism of the US Founding Fathers, and believe Integral is fundamentally misguided in its enthusiasm for “World Government” and democratic majority coercion. 2nd Tier is no guarantee against corruption and delusions of knowledge and control, which any central governance that is not strictly limited in its powers will eventually fall prey to. And what is the most reliable way to restrict that power? To leave people alone as much as possible, leaving individuals and local communities the ability to manage their own lives in context, spontaneously organising and thinking and developing for themselves.
Remember, Ron Paul’s $4.2 Million money bomb on 5th of November (Guy Fawkes Day) was completely decentralised, and his campaign staff had nothing to do with organising it except “getting out of the way”. This is a beautifully poetic reflection of the power of “wu-wei” that Ron Paul represents.
I like a number of Ron Paul’s ideas, including introducing this Bill. If Obama gets the Democratic nomination (and I’m working on thatl) then Ron Paul might be the ideal running mate.