09 January 2010

Pluto Becomes the Sun

Pluto may no longer be a planet, but its namesake, the Roman god of the underworld and wealth, is about to become the sun. Or at least the most powerful force on our planet.

Our courts are set to unravel the campaign finance laws that have been teetering for the last decade. Read all about it here.

In essence, we are making the unofficial golden rule the official - whoever has the gold makes the rules. Our existence as a democracy is coming to an actual end. People have already abandoned the public forum for the private market, deciding who should win elections based on the loudest voices they hear.

Those with the most money can now truly buy the electorate. By being able to dominate the conversation by purchasing the air by which we speak to one another, they truly will have bought the public square.

Mark these words, we became Imperial Rome in 2010, when the Senatus Populus Que Americus became actual property, bought with bread and circuses. If we thought Muslim terrorists would destroy us, Pogo turns out to be right again. "We have met the enemy, and he is us."


Revwilly said...

We are a nation of laws based on a constitution. If the laws are unconstitutional are the courts actually at fault? Are not the makers of the laws at fault?

You also refer to us as a democracy. We are not. We are a republic. "...and to the republic for which is stands." There is a big difference between a pure democracy and a republic.

I trust you are using some hyperbole when you speak of us becoming Imperial. You usually don't go over the top on things. Are you not feeling well?

WFW said...


I have no grief with the Courts. They do what they must. Republic, res publica, means a public thing, owned by the people not the king. Representative democracy is what I believe you mean, as opposed to direct democracy.

That's fine too. But are those elected serving those who elect them? Or those who helped them get elected, what are always called 'special interests' by those who do not like them.

I truly worry that we have allowed the forum to become the market, and that the state is operated for the benefit of those who have the most money in the game. When I say we, I mean the nation as a whole, not the courts.

This de facto use of power for the benefit of the few, I contend, will do more to harm us as a nation than Al Qaeda, because it comes from among us. It is, for my money, the same problem Chistendom faced in the 16th century when the Church was seen as more invested in keeping itself in power than using that power righteously.

Carolyn said...

I hear what you are saying, Fred, but unfortunately, it's what we've got right now. All we can do is work tirelessly to change "the way things are" insurmountable a task as that may seem. Recognize it, act on it and do the best you can, but don't let it get you down, my friend. Never let it get you down...at least not for long. Enjoy this beautiful, sunshiney day!

RalfW said...

"We are a nation of laws based on a constitution. If the laws are unconstitutional are the courts actually at fault?"

It is the court's interpretation of the law in question v. the constitution and that is, ultimately, subjective. They are likely to rule in favor of deciding that money=speech, a deeply chilling notion.

Were the court composed differently, the case might well be decided differently.

So, while we are a nation that holds (fairly) high the idea of the rule of law, it is not as if the Framers foresaw this eventuality and spoke to it.

So we have a very conservative, interventionist Supreme Court that will elevate aggregated cash over individual's power to speak. Not because the Constitution says it must be so, but because 5 men (I'm guessing as to the courts vote) think that is what it says.

I think Fred is right to be so troubled for our nation. I am troubled as well.

Revwilly said...

I guess we have to include the unions in the equation now, since they have the power to persuade the President to tax others to pay for health insurance.