Topic: Constitutional
Its a pretty cake, frosted with what appears to be as pure as the wind- driven snow, Constitutionalist- conservative, Patriotic layer, but underneath, it is subversive and progressive.
This Cake comes in many flavors and forms, it always presents itself as a tempting treat to a Patriot who reveres the Constitution and rule of law, but underneath, always the same anti American elements-
mainly, urging "democracy"
Last I checked, America is not a democracy.
The group is beating a drum that started, in my experience, back in the 1980s, I knew someone who was writing and speaking on the topic of eliminating corporate personhood. Its roots are in the Jesuit Social Justice movement.
Their website:
http://movetoamend.org/contact-us
My response:
==============
I was interested as I knew someone who was writing and publishing on this topic back in the 1980s, but after seeing the SUBVERSIVE elements on your literature and website, I cannot join you.
Your website and pamphlets advocate subversion of the United States and its Constitution.
1.) The US is NOT a democracy. It is subversive to advocate replacing our Constitutional Republic with a Democracy. There are lots of Left wing operatives out there shouting "American Democracy" but what they actually mean is to REPLACE our Constitution with democracy. Democracy is a feature of Communist and Socialist states. If you truly do not understand the problem, get various old history texts that discuss Alexander the Great and his invention of demokratia. It is not American.
The Founders had the option to use democracy and chose not to.
2.) There are lots of politically subversive Troll groups like yours trying to find any trick available to amend the Constitution. The Constitution is not the problem, it is a LEGAL problem. Once the flood-gates of Amending the C are open, then other subversive causes like term limits can be pursued, eventually gutting the C. itself.
3.) the false generalization about "Constitutional rights" - there is no such thing, the C. does not grant rights, and if it did, it could be amended to eliminate them. Our rights existed BEFORE and without the C., and there is no language within the C that generates or accords or distributes rights.
Rights in America are God given, not distributed by some group of persons.
Youre also playing a red herring, the premise up front is related to campaign contributions, but then changing to "corporte personhood." They are two different topics, and NEITHER is a Constitutional issue.
If/when the subversive elements were removed and the stated goal, of eliminating this rotten corporate structure, was being offered, then I could join and donate.
Until then, not going to happen.
============
EVERY one of these subversive Left wing groups, or more honest groups that have been infiltrated like the Tea Party and OWS ( I caught the local TP pushing a WA Bill that would allow people to vote twice, Blogged here), operate on a basic principle, to identify the founding principles of America, under-cut them, and replace them with Communist principles.
In this case, it's an ad-hominem attack on the Constitution by setting up some narrative such as "corporations are out of control" which is true, getting you and I on the bandwagon and donating money, while subverting the organization or cause, so that the end result is, they hope, a movement to open up, gut, then throw out the US Constitution.
Over my dead body...
The game here is that somehow the Constitution is the problem so it must be changed. These people somehow believe they know more about the Founding of this Nation and the intent of the Founders, and political/social/religious theories and the forces that drove the American Revolution, than did the Founders themselves. That belief is evident in the fact they want to change the Constitution.
If it needed changing, then OK, there is a process for that.
It does not. This is a complicated "blame the victim" scam.
It ESPECIALLY does not need opening up and modifing based on a problem with a LEGAL FICTION which is what corporate personhood is. If this is a problem, open the LAW up and change it.
Their position is contradictory in that a corporation is not established under the Constitution, but they advocate operating on the Constitution as a remedy. Nonsense.
What this is is JACK STRAW at work, and I stumbled on an excellent example lately of Straws subversive intent -
http://www.lawteacher.net/articles/0456.php
The Big Picture here is to allow, by hook or crook, Government to modify the Constitution, then to control it. Afterwards the Government is no longer under the control of the People through THEIR Constitution. This is happening in places, right now, like Egypt where a sitting Government (Muslim Brotherhood via proxy) is attempting to fashion its own Constitution.
The Constition in the US does two things:
1.) forms Government
2.) limits Government and forbids it to infringe on Citizens Rights.
Remember that each time a question like this appears, is that question within the scope of LIMITED GOVERNMENT? This one is NOT.
PS I wrote two years ago about another subversive plank being floated through the Tea Party, some proposed legislation that, in part, advocated letting people VOTE TWICE until they got caught. Its blogged here somewhere.
PSS on the topic of corporations, money and political campaigns, THAT ALREADY EXISTS - its called CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM. Why doesnt this group jump on THAT bandwagon?
Think about it...
