- This topic has 32 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 5 months, 1 week ago by .
-
Posts
-
While I will refer to the Trump trial this thread isn’t intended to debate the merits of his innocence or guilt. Its to bring out a greater point.
Lets discuss the system of our democracy:As it pertains to crimes and prosecution:
1) For one silly financial sin that we can all agree is not a cardinal crime one can get charged 34 times over?? Isn’t that insane? Its one crime. Why get so busy with statutes. It makes non sense. Murder crimes have fewer charges.
2) Its easier to get convicted on financial crimes than murder and rape. Look at OJ & Bill Cosby vs Trump and so many others. Isn’t that a bit insane. We worship money so much that it became the crime of the century and its burden of proof is lower.
3) High celebrities’ and rich white people get scrutinized alot more bec the prosecutor then gains more fame. Ask yourself why trump was never scrutinized this much before his politcal career. You think he was straight then and only became crooked now? He is a known ganef.As it pertains to Free Speech:
1) Should we be allowing nazis to ryle up crowds and chant death to jews bec of free speech?
2) Should we be allowing Free Plaestine to yell from river to sea and call for the elmination of Israel? Why are they allowed to protest without permits?
3) The newspapers, should they really be able to report everything? How about when they believe Hamas lies? What if that causes our hostages to stay in prison longer or CVS die? What if it puts jewish lives in danger while emboldening and hardening Hamas? As an example the NYT yesterday had an arttcle holding Israel accountable for closing down UNRWA. Not a wrod about the point the UNRWA members were Hamas members. This emblodens hamas. Isn’t there a point where when lives are at stake we should be limtying free speech.Guns
I know this is holy by many latlley. But hear me out. If you argue that owning guns save lives its fair debate. However, lets say for a second you believe it doesn’t save lives but you say hey its our second ammendment and I don’t care. Then let me ask you is the bill of rights lehadvl our torah which is pure prophecy and every word is emes. If guns do kill people what does that say about our amendments. who says its moral then?Elections
Lets say you love Trump, but you gotto admit he is not your typical and bissel mishiga. Maybe a good mishigna but crazy. Now let me ask you if trump can be elected why can’t a Hitler YMS be elected next time. What stops any populist? To be clear, no trump is not an evil Hitker ym’s. I am only making the point that there are no limits who can be elected as long as he gets the votes. Is that moral?All this is to say, our democracy is a brpken system that is very immoral still
If you object to the American political system, blame the guy in the mirror? We elect our leaders. If the government is run by corrupt amoral fools, blame the people who elected them.
1. One can also be charged multiple times for one sin. This is discussed in the second perek of Makkot.
2. Free speech is a two-way street. Jews may yell for the expulsion of all Arabs or the total destruction of Gaza. I presume that arrests were made because of the lack of permits.
3. Yes. Otherwise, the government will be able to tell us anything and everything.Chaim,
American founders created a system that tried to take into account human frailties and make it work around dangers of both despotism and lawless anarchy. At previous times, democracy was not a discredited word: ancients tried it in Greece and Rome and it was eventually supplanted by “benevolent” Kings, who were expected to be responsible with the people that “belonged” to them, similar to how every balabos takes care of things inside his house for his own sake. Letting unruly masses to run the country was considered insane. Two attempts were made simultaneously: France and USA. French experiment ran indeed insane very quickly, leading to mass lawful and unlawful murder of lots of people, both from old regime and between revolutionaries themselves. It did work out in a long term. American experiment ran surprisingly better and USA has 250 years of elections, interrupted just once by a civil war period. Compare it with the history of European countries and all the wars and revolutions they generated.So, there is clearly something done right in this country. Does it mean that courts and free speech rules are perfect? of course not. But it would make sense to learn first about how they developed in history. If you would like a kosher perspective on history. I would recommend Rabbi Berel Wein. I see that he has a book “The Golden Land: The Jewish Experience in the United States and Canada” also recordings on Torah downloads, etc.
Each democracy is as good as the candidates who run for
elected office and the voters who elect the candidates.When the candidates who run for elected office are:
honest, intelligent, wise, sincere, honorable people,
then democracy is great,When the candidates who run for elected office are:
dishonest, stupid, foolish, insincere, dishonorable people,
then democracy is in big trouble,Chanyana Weissman for President Square Root for first lady
It is perhaps the longest and most sustainable work in progress towards some notion of a democratic system that is both morally just and functional. Some might argue that the UK and other European models have features that are preferable but I doubt one could argue they are “functional” in terms of frequency of governmental changes in a parliamentary system and comparison with U.S. economic growth and prosperity over any long-term time period. The real quandary is why in a country with 330 million souls, we seem to have such dreadful choices again for our leadership in 2024.
Chaim87
Unfortunately, we now live in a Jacksonian democracy. Prosecutors need to win elections and shift their focus accordingly.
over long term, American and European systems are pretty competitive
If increasing number of people increases choices, then the UN secretary will be the biggest tzaddik.
Our system has plusses and minuses. No one said it’s perfect.
The justice system can certainly be abused. Financial crimes are important for a number of reasons. But most of those convicted don’t get jail time.
Other democracies are less fundamentalist about free speech. Pro-Hamas protests are illegal in France, for example. Praising terrorism is illegal in the UK.
These countries also regulate guns heavily. Their murder rates are much lower. There are some stabbings, but overall, things are safer.
Of course, they let in so many immigrants that anti-Semitism has made things feel unsafe for Jews in a few areas. Here, the Muslims we’ve let in are mainly well-educated and wealthy, and although many support Hamas ideologically, they rarely attack us.
Your point about populists is well taken. This is one reason why many Jews (including Satmar I believe) supported Hillary rather than Trump. It’s better that politicians be calm, stable individuals rather than fiery populists with a cult of personality.
You’re right that the media can’t be trusted when it comes to Israel.
All these things can be changed. You can start new media companies, vote for different candidates, advocate different gun laws, etc.
All govts are corrupt. There aren’t any impartial judges.
We have an appealette system where if something is incorrect, will be revealed and corrected.
Chaim > I question specifically the American style democracy. I advocate that yes maybe we need a style like you outline in France
American system is somewhat different from European. As Gemorah says – better to live in a new town than in an old, as its sins are fewer.
European countries are (or were until recently) groups of a small number of homogeneous groups. (Jews were an exception for most of last 2000 years, that is why everyone was against us). USA system was created from the scratch to accommodate differing views. Original idea was that each state is almost a sovereign entity that can have their own laws, religion, with certain federal laws that make the states leave peacefully and cooperatively with each other. Bill of rights applied to the feds, the state could have, and had, established religions, for example. Things are more complicated now, but the idea is still there: the role of the government, ideally, is not so much as to establish one community, but to accommodate multiple communities. This is really well designed for what the Jews want (and is similar to what we had in Poland as Vaad Arabah Artzot had a state within the state).
So, if you will invite government to suppress speech against us, then it will surely end up with suppressing our speech. We will be better off if we use the freedoms this country grants us to build a community with beautiful speech and actions between each other.
The USA is NOT a Democracy, It is a Republic….big difference
Democracy, one person, one vote
Look at the US Senate: a Senator from Wyoming represents approx 290,000 people, one from California represents approx 19,600,000#2 Don’t confuse the Federal Judicial system and state systems. Trump was charged with 34 counts of violating NY State Law and prosecuted by the State. There are 50 states with different legal systems. It has nothing to do with the US system of Democracy. OJ and Cosby were tried for State crimes in Pennsylvania and California under their state legal systems,
#3 Free Speech/Freedom of the Press…this applies to Government action. Permits to protest are a local government issue, except if the protest is to be held on Federal land.
If you don’t like the lies told on a particular network, don’t watch. No viewers equals no revenue and they may go out of business, News organizations don’t have to prove truth of everything they report,
Being Devil’s advocate, why should American newspapers be restricted in what they print because hostages from another country are being held? You talk about ‘OUR” hostages and that applies to our unique status as Jews, but not to the vast majority of Americans.#4 GUNS, I don;t think any private citizen in the US should have one, Proponents of the Second Amendment conveniently forget that it talks about a well organized militia, That means the national Guard. I have no objection to Guard members, law enforcement, Corrections offices having guns. I even would allow private ownership of long rifles and shotguns for hunting purposes in rural areas, but no semi-automatics or bumpstocks.
For those that claim they enjoy target practice. I would allow ownership of guns that must be kept locked up at a licensed gun range and never allowed to leave the premises,
#5 ELECTIONS
see my first comments, get rid of the Electoral College that makes the value of the voter in Wyoming work XXX ties one in California, NY or Florida.
Then: States, not the Federal Government decide who can run for office and who can vote. There is not a countrywide standard.
In CT, which I just left after more than 70 years. Convicted felons lose their vote, BUT after completion of their sentence, probation, ordered restitution they can petition for restoration of voting rights. Once a registered voter they can run for office. This the CONVICTED Mayor of Bridgeport who served 9 years in FEDERAL prison for stealing hundreds of thousands of dollars from the city got his vote back and was returned to office three times.
In some states, convicts can vote from prison, in others they never get their voting rights back.The Supreme Court ruled this year that Trump could not be kept off the Ballot in Colorado, despite states havings these rights. If Trump was not seeking a Federal position the decision might have been different.
How to fix this? Constitutional Amendments, bt most fail. Remember the ERA failed to be ratified by the required number of states and women to not have equal rights across America. The ERA was enshrined into the MA, CT, NY and NJ constitutions decades ago,
Disclosure: I have practiced law for decades, I teach Government and Law
I don’t politic in the Coffee Room, but will explain the system and correct misstatements of fact and/or law.Our US system has flaws not envisaged in the late 1700s, but it is ne of the best systems in the world.
Ex-CTL, thanks for a good summary. I would like to point out a couple of points:
1) the federal system works in a unique way in USA – it is a big country with recently arrived (a couple of centuries on average) population that is pretty mobile (most, except the natives and the slaves, come from people who volunteered to go to the other side of the world). Thus, if you do not like your state laws, you can easily relocate to one of the remaining 49. Same language, currency, even starbucks and other chains. This creates choices for population and competition between state governments. This compensates for the biggest weakness of the modern state – there is competition in private sector, but not in public. Of course, the more feds take over, the less gov competition there is.
2) These freedoms of movement and of religion and of the press are used best by mobile and active population that is not afraid to make choices and act (anshei chayil in the words of Yisro). The rest of the population gets captured by whatever government and information channel they get… and they suffer from the freedoms they are not able to take advantage of. Arguably, these people would be better off with the government that takes care of them, does not allow hate speech, provides social safety, etc
Chaim re: Egypt. This is exactly what US and similar systems are designed for – control by masses. This danger was known from ancient times and that is why “democracy” was discredited and was not tried for centuries. Possibly, early modernity that made more people educated allowed thinking about letting more people to participate in the government.
@Chaim
If people don’t buy the newspaper or watch the network, the business fails,
Most US newspapers have folded in the past 30 years.When I was growing up we had 5 newspapers delivered daily and there were three tv networks with a 15 minute nightly new broadcast.
Now news delivery is quite different.I never read a print newspaper as the news is state before it is delivered
@Chaim87
Re: your June 6th reply.I don’t like lies posted about me.
You may not agree with my political views, I don’t care, BUT despite your lies, I have never copied and pasted liberal or any other arguments. My thoughts expressed are in my own words.
I don’t drink Kool-Aid and I don’t hurl personal insults at others in the CR just because I don’t agree with them.Prosecutors only need to win elections in some jurisdictions. In CT neither prosecutors or trial/appellate court judges are elected
@Chaim87
What was offensive about your June 6 reply was the false statement you made that I copy and paste ….,
I am a septuagenarian who does not copy and paste. I choose my own words carefully.
Anyone who has read my comments and/or posts the last 15 years can see that they are my own words.
I also don’t call names when disagreeing with another viewpoint.That said, I oppose government censorship of the press. The First Amendment to the Constitution which protects us from a government sponsored religion also guarantees this freedom.
I only believe in certain limitations as they apply to national security or protecting privacy ( such as not posting names of rape victims).Back in the day newspapers had political ideology and one bought and read the one you agreed with. Today you chose an online news source you identify with.
I grew up in New Haven and the Jackson Family who owned and published the two local papers were staunch republicans. We didn’t read the editorial pages for this reason, but it was the only source of local news and advertising.
Today almost every daily in CT is owned by Hearst and not worth reading, circulation is in the toilet tans I have no friends who buy the papers. I check obituaries free on line.It is not the job of government to protect us from populist/fascist candidates by censoring the press. That would make the government as evil as the candidate you want silenced.
Yes, the masses may be taken in by the populist, but that freedom of expression and the vote is the spine of our country.
chaim > How does democracy save us from those dangers?
right, that is why throughout a lot of history, democracy was not practiced. It works when (1) voting public (does not have to be all population) are suffiently educated (2) there are parts of the system that can stop passions (republic, courts, etc)
Kaviat Emptor, buyer beware, similarly, voter beware.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.