A New Deal For Canada?

Posted on Monday, July 25 at 22:31 by Patm
“Since that struggle, however, man’s inventive genius released new forces in our land which reordered the lives of our people. The age of machinery, of railroads; of steam and electricity; the telegraph and the radio; mass production, mass distribution-all of these combined to bring forward a new civilization and with it a new problem for those who sought to remain free.” “For out of this modern civilization economic royalists carved new dynasties. New kingdoms were built upon concentration of control over material things. Through new uses of corporations, banks and securities, new machinery of industry and agriculture, of labor and capital – all undreamed of by the fathers – the whole structure of modern life was impressed into this royal service.” “There was no place among this royalty for our many thousands of small-businessmen and merchants who sought to make a worthy use of the American system of initiative and profit. They were no more free than the worker or farmer. Even honest and progressive-minded men of wealth, aware of their obligation to their generation, could never know just where they fitted into this dynastic scheme of things.” “It was natural and perhaps human that the privileged princes of these new economic dynasties, thirsting for power, reached out for control over government itself. They created a new despotism and wrapped it in the robes of legal sanction. In its service new mercenaries sought to regiment the people, their labor, and their property. And as a result the average man once more confronts the problem that faced the Minute Man.” “The hours men and women worked, the wages they received, the conditions of their labor – these had passed beyond the control of the people, and were imposed by this new industrial dictatorship. The savings of the average family, the capital of the small-businessmen, the investments set aside for old age – other people’s money – these were the tools which the new economic royalty used to dig itself in.” “Those who tilled the soil no longer reaped the rewards which were their right. The small measure of their gains was decreed by men in distant cities.” “Throughout the nation, opportunity was limited by monopoly. Individual initiative was crushed in the cogs of a great machine. The field open for free business was more and more restricted. Private enterprise, indeed, became too private. It became privileged enterprise, not free enterprise.” “An old English judge once said: ‘Necessitous men are not free men.’ Liberty requires opportunity to make a living – a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for.” “For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor-other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.” “Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government. The collapse of 1929 showed up the despotism for what it was. The election of 1932 was the people’s mandate to end it. Under that mandate it is being ended.” “The royalists of the economic order have conceded that political freedom was the business of government, but they have maintained that economic slavery as nobody’s business. The granted that the government could protect the citizen in his right to vote, but they denied that the government could do anything to protect the citizen in his right to work and his right to live.” “Today we stand committed to the proposition that freedom is no half-and-half affair. If the average citizen is guaranteed equal opportunity in the polling place, he must have equal opportunity in the market place.” “These economic royalists complain that we seek to overthrow the institutions of America. What they really complain of is that we seek to take away their power. Our allegiance to the American institutions requires the overthrow of this kind of power. In vain they seek to hide behind the flag and the Constitution. In their blindness they forget what the flag and the Constitution stand for. Now, as always, they stand for democracy, not tyranny; for freedom, not subjugation; and against a dictatorship by mob rule and the over-privileged alike.” “The brave and clear platform adopted by this convention, to which I heartily subscribe, sets forth that government in a modern civilization has certain inescapable obligations to its citizens, among which are protection of the family and the home, the establishment of a democracy of opportunity, and aid to those overtaken by disaster.” “But the resolute enemy within our gates is ever ready to beat down our words unless in greater courage we will fight for them.” “For more than three years we have fought for them. This convention, in every word and deed, has pledged that the fight will go on.” “The defeats and victories of these years have given to us as a people a new understanding of our government and of ourselves. Never since the early days of the New England town meeting have the affairs of government been so widely discussed and so clearly appreciated. It has been brought home to us that the only effective guide for the safety of this most worldly of worlds, the greatest guide of all is moral principle.” “We do not see faith, hope, and charity as unattainable ideals, but we use them as stout supports of a nation fighting the fight for freedom in a modern civilization.” “Faith – in the soundness of democracy in the midst of dictatorships.” “Hope – renewed because we know so well the progress we have made.” “Charity – in the true spirit of that grand old word. For charity literally translated from the original means love, the love that understands, that does not merely share the wealth of the giver, but in true sympathy and wisdom helps men to help themselves.” “We seek not merely to make government a mechanical implement, but to give it the vibrant personal character that is the very embodiment of human charity.” “We are poor indeed if this nation cannot afford to lift from every recess of American life the dread fear of the unemployed that they are not needed in the world. We cannot afford to accumulate a deficit in the books of human fortitude.” “In the place of the palace of privilege we seek to build a temple out of faith and hope and charity.” “It is a sobering thing, my friends, to be a servant of the great cause. We try in our daily work to remember that the cause belongs not to us, but to the people. The standard is not in the hands of you and me alone. It is carried by America. We seek daily to profit from experience, to learn to do better as our task proceeds.” “Governments can err, presidents do make mistakes, but the immortal Dante tells us that Divine justice weighs the sins of the cold-blooded and the sins of the warm-hearted on different scales.” “Better the occasional faults of a government that lives in a spirit of charity than the consistent omissions of a government frozen in the ice of its own indifference.” “There is a mysterious cycle in human events. To some generations much is given. Of other generations much is expected. This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny.” “In this world of ours in other lands, there are some people, who, in times past, have lived and fought for freedom, and seem to have grown too weary to carry on the fight. They have sold their heritage of freedom for the illusion of living. They have yielded their democracy.” “I believe in my heart that only our success can stir their ancient hope. They begin to know that here in America we are waging a great and successful war. It is not alone a war against want and destitution and economic demoralization. It is more than that; it is a war for the survival of democracy.” “We are fighting to save a great and precious form of government for ourselves and the world.” “I accept the commission you have tendered me. I join with you. I am enlisted for the duration of the war.” Franklin Delano Roosevelt Acceptance speech for the Democratic nomination for President Philadelphia – June 27, 1936

Contributed By


Topic


Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Tue Jul 26, 2005 6:20 am
    Timely post many many years later???

    ---
    "We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

  2. Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:12 pm
    Yeah, amazing how similar conditions were back then and now. The vernacular has changed, thats about it. (This is PatM btw: from a different comp!

  3. Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:17 pm
    Good post, we are constantly told that history repeats itself, my question is when will we actually learn from history?

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  4. Tue Jul 26, 2005 5:27 pm
    It appears the collective we never will.
    interesting how that works, ain't it?

    one one could almost start to believe it is planned, but nah
    Who would do that? What would they gain?

    ---

    Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boy.
    -Parliament of Whores

  5. Wed Jul 27, 2005 12:21 am
    It depends, Catherine, on whether or not we can get a government that is actually interested in real change. One I think we need, as a society, is something like a "vision statement" for the entire country. Much like a constitution, this document should detail (among other things) what the country stands for and set out certain unalianable rules about education.

    1) From elementary school on, it should be engrained in every Canadian Child that THEY are the government. The people we elect are our spokespeople, not our masters. Voting is not simply a right, it is an obligation. Party politics should be downplayed, vote for the candidate, not the party. Our politicians and media have been working hard at just the opposite - make sure we know we are small and powerless, good little mild and industrious animals...

    2) The effects Banking should be taught starting in high-school, when the kids have the math skills to be able to see what is happening. Banking can be very beneficial to society as long as it is kept small. Once you let it get big, you get the situation that faced the 1930s and today.

    3) The anti-capitalist effects of free trade, monopolies (cartels, oligopolies, etc), and concentration of wealth should be spelled out and taught in early high school.

    4) One of the most important once, media ownership should not be allowed accumulate in only a few hands. If you own a newspaper in Vancouver, you cannot own a TV station, a radio station, or even another paper.

    5) The single most important part, it should be specified that corporations are NOT persons. They are legal fictions, things, not humans. We have extended human rights to a THING. This "thing" exists solely to protect humans from liability. It cannot die, it feels no pain, it knows nothing of sickness and starvation, yet we give to it the rights of a living breathing person while at the same time absolve it of nearly all the responsibilities a living person has.

    One example: Free Speech. It may sound reasonable to extend the right of free speech to a corporation. However, that right ensures corporations own politicians. We cannot truly forbid corporations from swaying government because free speech has also been established to mean donating to political parties. Corporations have FAR, FAR, more money than the general public and therefore have FAR, FAR more influence on politicians than you or I. That is NOT democratic.

    Read "Unequal Protection: The Rise of Corporate Dominance and the Theft of Human Rights", by Thom Hartman. Its an extremely good book!

  6. Wed Jul 27, 2005 3:45 am
    Great post anon! Very good points, who came up with the corporate person idea, I wonder?

    ---
    If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

  7. Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:54 am
    a search for the book yeilded this <br />
    <br />
    <a href="http://www.loompanics.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/Articles/WhichCorporation.html?E+scstore">http://www.loompanics.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/Articles/WhichCorporation.html?E+scstore</a><br />
    <br />
    One of the most admirable traits coming out of thr US is the introspection of some of the authors there<br />
    <br />
    Dose anyone have a list of like-mined Canadian writers?<p>---<br><br />
    Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boy. <br />
    -Parliament of Whores

  8. by Patm
    Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:59 pm
    The idea that corporations (legal contracts) are somehow actual persons stems from a battle between the railroads and government in the States.

    In 1886, the Supreme Court heard the case Santa Clara Country vs Southern Pacific Railroad. The county had increased a local tax on the railroad and the railroad didn't like it. Amongst the arguments the railroad used was that corporations are persons under the 14th ammendment (specifying equality and human rights for he recently freed slaves) and that this tax constituted unequal taxation which the 14th ammendment made them immune to.


    Now, both the writers of the 14th ammendment and the US Supreme Court had repeatedly said that corporations are not persons and the 14th ammendment applied only to natural persons - NOT corporations.

    The railroad won the case - the court decided that the County did not have the power to tax in this fashion, but that the state did. During the proceedings, the court said it would not hear any arguments claiming personhood for corporations and the judgement clearly allowed for taxation that would contravent the civil rights of the railroad if it had been considered a "person" under the law.

    The court reporter in his summary (headnotes) wrote that corporations were persons so the county could not tax in that fashion. Pay attention - the court REPORTER is the one that said corporations were persons. The reporter and his headnotes have no bearing on law - the headnotes are just commentary.

    From the US and this case, corporations took the "precident" and managed to get recognized around the world as persons.

    Its one of the biggest cock-ups in history. One that could easily be corrected, but no sitting member of government seems to want to cut off the gravy train of corporate soft and hard money.

  9. by Patm
    Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:00 pm
    PS-those points were mine, I forgot to log in. Not used to boards that allow anonymous postings!



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news