...representation.

Just working on a project dealing with American History and I was listening to a re-enactor portraying Thomas Jefferson. Its got me to thinking. Are we really in a system now where our representative government really represents the people who elected them to office? In my case, do Senators Byrd and Rockefeller really represent the collective body of West Virginians who repeatedly send them back to Washington? Is it possible for a professional politicial to represent a people he or she is so far disconnected from?

My general feeling is...no. The Founding Fathers were leaders of their time, but they "kept their day jobs" as well. In the end, most lost everything they had (property and status) in the fight for freedom. Many died poor, but the vision of the country they were trying to create made it all worth while.

I have to think that if those men of yesteryear were to be teleported forward to see what we've done with their vision, I think they would be disappointed. Sure, there are a few things we've improved upon (mainly, the abolition of slavery), but overall I don't think we're carried the torch as high nor has is shown as brightly as it once did.

I would almost say...(hmm, maybe I will say)...that no business entity or interest should have any say in the government or political process that out weighs the will and desire of the people. Any business comes down to the owner, board of directors and/or stock holders, who are individuals, and should not be allowed to use their position or power to exert more influence than afforded any other person through vote and freedom of expression. Anything else begins to cultivate the specter of tyranny, whether political or economic.

"How can I set free anyone who doesn't have the guts to stand up alone and declare his own freedom?" - Jim Morrison

Last edited: Tuesday, October 18, 2005 at 12:58:17 PM

Gee. I thought the gang would be all over this one.

The particular way and the circumstances that surrounded the founding of our country are interesting but not more important than the ideas involved. Namely that the state exists to serve the individual as opposed to the individual existing to serve the state. We are now experiencing a shift from one pole of that statement towards the other.