The American Experiment

In The Federalist Papers 10, James Madison argued that in the Republic various "factions" would spar over control. The "factioning" of the Republic is both natural and healthy. These "factions" as Madison wrote would allow for competition and a wide array of beliefs, values, solutions, etc. Factions, in a modern sense, can best be seen as special interest groups, political parties, even the separate branches of government. Imagine a pendulum that swings back and forth from time to time. Such a constant flux and teetering is an inherently good thing as a prolonged concentration of power would amount to tyranny.

Historically, some have argued that America is instead a society run by the elite. I suggest those interested read An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution. While I cede that power during the early days of the Republic was predominately white, male plantation owners; today's society is far more diverse. The power advantage that once traditional elites held has slowly given way to the more pluralistic viewpoint for two reasons. The methodology and structure of the America political system is very hostile to a power grab by a given group of elites. To change a given policy, one must convince the executive branch, then the legislative branch which consists of two very different chambers (with a majority), ensure the judiciary will interpret the law according to an elite's viewpoint, get approval from the bureaucracy, and finally have the media spin it correctly. This cumbersome division of power specifically prevents a power grab of one group of people. Each and everyone of the institutions have to be in lock-step to finally get an idea into law. These "safeguards" are for all intensive purposed the "factions" Madison spoke of. Many might argue that the elites get what they want- not so.

A modern example- political elites (with power and money on their side) wanted to reform Social Security to privatize the account and allow greater money making opportunities, yet regardless of what opponents call "elite connections, wealth, etc." such a proposal failed due in part because of other "factions" were able to block such a move.

The elite power model school of thought simply is wrong (too much people's dismay). America is, as Madison articulated, a pluralist society where numerous "factions" compete for power, resources, etc. Perhaps one faction might be more powerful than another but it is still a conflict of "factions."

JAG meets 9/11

Did anybody ever watch the USA's series JAG. Big fan! It's about the military justice system and the lawyers who take on the cases specifically for the U.S. Navy- the Judge Advocate General i.e. JAG. Really good series, if y'all are every bored or just wanna see a pretty good made for tv series- I'm telling you.... JAG.

FYI USA programming, you can send the check to my campus mailbox for that plug. LOL.

Back on topic- So my topic is going to be should "enemy combatants" i.e. terrorists be allowed to face trial in a civilian court of law or face military tribunals?

Snowing

I just had to acknowledge the fact it is snowing! I love it.

Against All

So I'll be the first to say it... I'm resisting the notion that most of the topics discussed in class or in the book are deemed "social issues" or "social problems." And even more so, that government should enact policies to remedy these complexities in modern society. Not everything under the sun is a "social issue" or a "oh god, we must fix X"

I stand firmly in opposition that for example, government should do something to remedy the inequality of wealth. Or healthcare. Just putting that out there.

Comments, criticism, or maybe even praise (though I doubt it)?

The Man Behind The Curtain

I am from San Antonio, Texas. I am the product of extensive years in both public and private schools. I was very active in high school. I was the editor-in-chief of our school's paper, The Statesman. I was in debate for a couple of years; I qualified to go to Nationals. I was a delegate (meaning I was appointed) into the student government by both my peers and teachers. Academia aside, I love to cook- its a passion of mine. Making and enjoying fine food is something I love to do with friends and family. I travel extensively but I still love my Texas roots. I cannot stop my addiction to reading current affairs and history books. I don't think you can avoid politics when you mention my name. I live, eat, and breathe politics.

I am a simple-minded, opinionated person. I love to learn more about people- I promise I don't bite regardless of what you may or may not have heard from others. I'm fair, honest, and have a sense of values (that sadly I think my generation has lost) such as hardwork, sacrifice, and being respectful to others. I strive to be a jack of all trades; I hope people consider me a gentleman- manners are very important to me. I am an only child. I love my family and friends. My mother and father are both nurses; I am the odd ball of the family not going into medicine. Instead, I intend to go to law school and follow my heart in Constitutional law.

Greetings and Salutations

Welcome to Its Common Sense 2007. Feel free to reply and post your thoughts, questions, and ideas.