- Published on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 00:30
- Written by Super User
By CHARLIE ALLO
It appears that man is losing the ability to reason, or is applying this ability to very selective areas within the environment.
There seems to be very little application being applied to the political arena, which has a major impact on the individual’s daily life, one would think that this area would receive more attention than it does. Care should be exercised when applying reason to the political arena, because there is a tendency to accept reality as an aspect of reason, the danger here is that a person may be using a rationality to support what is believed to be a reasoned position.
Establishing a reasoned position is not something that can be accomplished readily, it may require accumulating data from a variety of sources over a period of time, one good example of this is to evaluate what the politician is saying, as opposed to what he or she is doing. It would be a mistake to take a limited number of examples to establish a sound position being taken by the politician.
Politicians have learned over generations to speak in very generic terms that can be applied in more than one way, allowing the electorate to paint a picture that may not conform to the politician’s true intent, consequently the electorate needs to matchup the actions being taken by the politician to see if they comply with the image that the electorate has formed; this function has a built-in inhibitor, because the electorate is reluctant to admit that his or her interpretation was incorrect.
It is very likely that an electorate will have to have a number of contradictions to come to the realization that the politician’s rhetoric does not matchup with the actions being taken by the politician, this problem can be found in both political parties.
The electorate can have a number of positions, some of which may be in line with the position’s the politician is espousing, meaning that the electorate is satisfied with the picture that the politician has painted and the action’s being employed, but that does not mean that the actions are consistent with the aims of the U.S. Constitution.
If the electorate has any understanding of the general principles that are embodied in the Constitution, and if the electorate agrees with these principles, then they will use these principles to guide them in their reasoned evaluation of the rhetoric and actions taken by the politician.
The U.S. Government, almost since its inception, has been taking actions that have undermined the basic principles that has made our form of government so unique, the continual erosion of these principles are on the verge of completely negating many of the freedoms that we have taken for granted for the past two plus centuries, this dissolution
has been in hyper drive for the past four and a half generations, and the current administration has kicked the drive up a couple of notches.
The U.S. Congress appears to be at a loss as to how this problem can be corrected, or it does not have the fortitude to put a stop to the actions that are being taken by the Administrative Branch of government.
It would seem plausible to state that each and every state in the Union would have a case due to the fact that there have been a number of actions that have taken place that
bypassed a state’s sovereignty, and our individual representatives have no authority to give away the states’ sovereignty to the Administrative Branch of the Federal Government, it’s hard to understand how the actions taken by the Administrative Branch would not give the states standing.
It is extremely important for the electorate to understand the basic principles and the reasoning behind these principles, if one is going to make a reasoned evaluation of the government’s actions, and of the individuals that are supposed to represent us. The use of the principles imbedded in the U.S. Constitution should only be utilized as a paradigm if one
believes in our Constitution; apparently many of our elected officials do not believe in the Constitution, even though they have sworn to protect and defend it.
It’s about time the electorate put some thought into the people they are electing to represent them, failing to do so will eliminate any need to exercise this right in the future.