What prevents the USA from becomming a dictatorship?
Posted by David S on Thu, 05/29/2008 - 23:06 inThis thread will hopefully lead to some interesting discussion. The question is "What prevents the USA from becoming a dictatorship?"
Let's say the president got tired of sharing power with the legislative and judicial branches. Knowing that he is the commander in chief of the military, and knowing that the congress and supreme court do not have their own military, he orders the military to shut down congress and the court and throw the congressmen and judges in jail. Then he declares himself dictator for life. What keeps that from happening?
Alternatively it might be the top military brass who create a military coup. They do the same thing except they throw the president in jail too. Either way, it's the people who control the military who take control of the country. What keeps that from happening?
Subscribe to this thread- Flag as offensive
- Login or register to post comments
- 404 reads
If we have to fight them with arms, it will turn into the Middle East, Africa, what is coming soon to Europe, etc...
They have far advanced capabilities. The plan; if need be, is to use the SAT Network that is equipped with low meter res cams that transmit in real time. Quadrant out North America with 4 Geo-Stationary SATS interfaced to computer banks that have scripts written to identify Human movement, infrared, all the specs, etc..
Regional Ground Commands would be established. The Army for years has been mapping and plotting terrain, locations, etc, all over the United States. Plans have been continuously been updated using the GEO tracking capabilities.
Has anyone every spent any time looking around Area 51 on Google Earth? You cant anymore, they have restricted access.
(Theory)
I have. And there are markings around groom lake and others, they appear to be some type of burning so hot that there is nothing left but black. The Star Wars Program was created in the Regan Admin. It did go operational. And that is what the balls of light that have been video tapped and observed in and around area 51. It is the laser outside the Earths Atmosphere breaking all the layers of the Upper Atmosphere as a plasmatic ball of refracted light. They move they way they do for the target is on the ground, where the black marks are. These places are continually lazzed again and again.
Anyway, there technology is more advanced. If we go down that road, then we can exspect the entire country to be locked down, and a planted of the apes, or mad max type circumstances will then exist where their will be guerrilla warfare against a far superior enemy surrounded by ocean, that could last indefinitely.
There just has to be another way.
-The Jury
"I'm voting for Wayne Root, the Libertarian Candidate for President of the United States, on November 6, 2012. Root is currently the 2008 Vice Presidential Candidate for the Libertarian Party." http://www.rootforamerica.com
http://www.fija.org
What prevents the USA from becomming a dictatorship?
Investment.
Specifically, future investment and future borrowing. It would all quickly dry-up and the economy would be in shambles - - who would want to rule over a rust bucket economy? Perhaps Robert Mugabe?
in Haliburton, Blackwater, Taser, Bechtel, etc. (like so many senators) These companies will make a 'killing' in the event of something terrible happening on domestic grounds.
Also, the gov't, facing bankruptcy over social welfare payments it can't make, will be freed from its financial obligations.
What mainly keeps the goons from taking over too obviously is the knowledge that breaking the illusion of ' a free country' would raise the costs too dramatically to keep us all subjugated. The fact that most people are still willing to participate in this 'democracy' (or 'republic') shows the workability of the strategy being used to oppress us. The well-worn analogy of cooking a frog by slowly raising the temperature of the water is well-worn because it so accurately describes the behavior of the population in general.
As long as there are enough people who are brainwashed into the idea of a 'constitutional republic' that has armed personnel who have a MORAL RIGHT to initiate VIOLENCE on ANYONE who disobeys them FOR ANY REASON regardless of the fact that NO ONE was harmed by the alleged 'offense', the 'mystery' of "What keeps that from happening?" will continue.
Pretending that a 'nation' consisting of individuals who as Jefferson wrote are "created equal" requires an elite group of separate individuals who, as Orwell observed are "more equal than others" to maintain its prosperity is an exercise in pure denial of reality. Depending on these 'special' people to not abuse the power they wield, though not derived from those they rule over and with the knowledge that they will suffer no real consequences thereby is the practice of madness.
As long as we think in terms such as "the second amendment is one of the protections the founders gave us to prevent a dictator from taking over", we still miss the elephant in the room. The right to self defense is INHERENT in our very EXISTENCE. (Jefferson used the term 'self evident') NO OTHER PERSON can GIVE you what is ALREADY inherent just because they write it down. They can ACKNOWLEDGE those rights (which is what many maintain is the meaning of the Bill of Rights), but if they then DENY those same rights by claiming that they can steal your property by way of levying 'TAXES', they then are exposed as both liars and thieves.
What do you think?
www.freedomainradio.com
Obedience to God and State is subjugation to men.
"As long as there are enough people who are brainwashed into the idea of a 'constitutional republic' that has armed personnel who have a MORAL RIGHT to initiate VIOLENCE on ANYONE who disobeys them FOR ANY REASON regardless of the fact that NO ONE was harmed by the alleged 'offense', the 'mystery' of "What keeps that from happening?" will continue."
What do you think?
Agreed. The population has been brainwashed for decades. TV, advertising... how far does it go...
http://people.howstuffworks.com/brainwashing.htm
It's made people nutso.
Coming out of this culture, and learning how to re-think, re-program oneself, isn't easy. But truth is buried deep inside even the most sound sleeper.
That's why we're here, at BTM.
___________________
Freedom is an inside job
I agree with the point that rights are not something that any person, or group of persons, can give us. They are inherent in our being, and can only be recognized by others.
Where I think you have gone a little astray, though, is in the fact that we do have to give up small portions of our rights in order to enjoy the benefits of freedom--which freedom can only be had through participation in a society. Once we give up those parts of our rights to a society-created government, it is then up to us to make sure that the balance between tyranny and anarchy is upheld by that government, else our freedom is then compromised.
Government does have some claim on our property for its maintenance, though that balance can be easily thrown out of whack. Claiming that government has no such claim is only looking at half of the story. If you were left in a state of nature, without the benefit of government, then you would exist in a might-makes-right world where only the strongest can exercise their rights and all others' rights are subdued. Society, through government, upholds the rights, not delegated to government, of all people (in theory), thus nullifying the problems inherent in the state of nature. Our cost for participation in such a rights-affirming system, is, ironically, the delegation of the use of some portion of our rights to that government.
Obedience to God is the essence of true freedom. Obedience to yourself is shear arrogance.
Man, you were doing so good there until you got to the end of a reasonable statement and you had to go and add THIS--
"Obedience to God is the essence of true freedom. Obedience to yourself is shear arrogance."
First off, WHICH god? There are some 4,000 human-created ideations of god that I am aware of.
Secondly, there is nothing "truly free" about adhering to any man-made dogma. If someone makes the claim they know what god wants, and has "channeled" god into words, they are lying. Adhering to those lies is not freedom. It is voluntary enslavement to irrational thoughts. WHO would do that knowingly to themselves?
Thirdly, if someone claims THEY KNOW WHAT god IS, or WANTS, by definition they are arrogant. That is something unknowable. There is no KNOWING that, no matter which god, or which tenets, or which doctrine, or which scripture, or which book you claim as your divine source. To claim to KNOW the intent of something unknowable is, by definition, deluded insanity. To then claim that your insane delusions give you a right to proclaim that all who disregard your deluded, insane notions are ARROGANT?
I can't stop laughing!!
The humble simply state that the "origin of everything" question is unknowable. The arrogant are the ones who make the claim they know things which they cannot...
It is immoral to lie to children.
There is a topic waiting for you here: The Primacy of Locke
-----
You can have no dominion greater or less than that over yourself.
-Leonardo da Vinci
There is one other important protection; the Oath of Office for military officers. It reads:
I, [name], do solemnly swear, (or affirm,) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. (So help me God.)
Also according to Wikipedia;
"One notable difference between the officer and enlisted oaths is that the oath taken by officers does not include any provision to obey orders; while enlisted personnel are bound by the Uniform Code of Military Justice to obey lawful orders, officers in the service of the United States are bound by this oath to disobey any order that violates the Constitution of the United States."
source- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Uniformed_Services_Oath_of_Of...
In theory the officers would simply refuse to obey any orders which would overthrow our constitutional republic. (I've never been in the military so if I'm wrong about that I hope any forum members who are officers will correct me.)
I share AdamAdamR's concern that foreign troops in the US would have no alleigence to America and have not taken the oath.
Good point. So if officers are sworn to protect and defend the constitution from enemies foreign and domestic and if they are obligated to disobey orders if they are unconstitutional, then what does that make every officer who is partaking in the unconstitutional war in Iraq? What kind of punishment should these soldiers face for failing to uphold their oath?
I would guess that most military officers don't view the Iraq war as unconstitutional. The big question though is how would they view orders to attack American citizens. That's really what this thread is about. If they were given orders to round up US citizens and haul them off to prison camps would the officers obey their orders or would they recognize that as a blatant violation of the constitution and refuse to do it?
I concur with David S. The powers-that-be need an army if they want to be dictators. I'm not certain the U.S. military is all that gung-ho about policing Americans. And, the mercs and blckwtrs? They can make a mess, but there are not enough of them, especially well trained, to militarily define a dictatorship. Somehow the Constitution keeps hanging on... annoying as that may be to the wannebe dictators.
Mercenaries came to mind here. Some people would do anything for money. (example: Blackwater)
that is the sole reason at least in my opinion. i don't know of any other country where it's legal for citizens to own and carry firearms. i can think of a few oppressive regimes that could have been toppled from the inside very quickly had the population been packin' heat.
apparently the name change brought some sense with it
Well I agree the second amendment is one of the protections the founders gave us to prevent a dictator from taking over. But that would be a tough route to go. The people would have raw numbers on their side, but the military would have everything else. They are better trained, better organized and have much better weapons. The people would be without any command structure, mostly untrained, and out of shape. And they would have only small arms, which aren't much good against a tank. I am not saying they could not prevail eventually, but it could go either way.
Anyway I think there might be something else which could short circuit a coup. Can anyone else think of something?
on their own would be difficult if not impossible
Hence the unconstitutional presence of foregin soldiers on US soil (Mexican army coming over for training, aid, in pursuit, etc.) British army here on joint excercises, rumours of Russian army, U.N. forces conducting joint exercises
How are you gonna get a kid from here to shoot all his friends and put them in camps? They'd have to farm out the job to a UN peacekeeping group
ONe thing that could short circuit this is a couple generals or lower ranked people not agreeing to go along with it--- this idea, that it could somehow backfire -- has to scare them out of taking such a big risk -- unless they're able to put all the right people in place, a massive and coordinated underatking no doubt
i think that the fact alone that the population is armed is enough to prevent a full blown dictatorship from forming.
i believe that as long as guns are available to the people it will never come to a point where they would need to be used.
Any declaration of emergency due to: hurricane, earthquake, critical infrastructure disruption, infectious disease outbreak, flooding, meteorite strike, alien attack, false flag terrorism, real terrorism -- can be an impetus for martial law. I probably wouldn't happen unless it were a real emergency - like the internet getting crashed or something.
-----
You can have no dominion greater or less than that over yourself.
-Leonardo da Vinci