Thursday, February 6, 2020

We are in so much trouble - Revanchist President

After complaining about Nancy Pelosi ripping up Trump's speech, Pence, on the 5th of February said:

“I just have a strong feeling that she's going to the the last speaker of the House to sit in that seat for a long time.”

Rudy Giuliani on the first of February tweeted:

“Folks...asking me are Biden, Schiff, Comey, Hillary, etc... going to get away with this. I told them to keep watching.”

Going After FBI, House Members and political opponents

In today's (Feb 6) East Wing Speech to Trump's supporters,

“We've been going thru this now for over 3 years. It was evil. It was corrupt. It was dirty cops. It was leakers and liars. In my opinion these are the crookedest, most dishonest and dirtyist people I've ever seen. With all these horrible dirty cops who took these dossiers and did bad things. They knew all about it. The FISA courts should be ashamed of themselves, tremendous corruption. Dirty Cops. Bad people. If this happened to President Obama, a lot of people would have been in jail for a long time already. Many years....If I didn't fire James Comey we would have never found this stuff. Because When I fired that sleaze-bag, all hell broke out. They were ratting on each other. They were running for the hills. Let's see what happens.”

When Trump trashed the FBI, “Barr [was] smiling and applauding.” That is a warning shot that purges are coming to the FBI, most likely starting with Christopher Wray. Trump already is using the FBI, apparently without Wray's knowledge running covert operations like “Iron Fist” Apparently they are going after “Black Identity Extremists” and infiltrating suspect groups with undercover agents. Trump pledged revenge against the FBI. When he says “let's see what happens” he is promising to prosecute FBI officials and persecute former FBI officals. And when Barr smiles and applauds, he's volunteering to do it.

Plotting Revenge

Trump and his surrogates and cronies are plotting revenge. Trump is promising that they will now use the machinery of Government to prosecute and persecute Pelosi, Schiff, Comey, Hillary, Romney, and pretty much anyone who crossed Donald John Trump. And Barr will do at least some of the work.

I said a while back that Barr Was Trump's Chaika. Well, Putin just dumped Yuri Chaika from his administration. But I'm sure someone else will step up. Meanwhile we have another round of abuse of power and obstruction getting started even before the Senate rendered a verdict.

Trump Wants his J. Edgar Hoover

To be fair, Woodrow Wilson used the DOJ to go after personal enemies, including Suffragettes demonstrating for Women to have Voting rights. Warren Harding had a corrupt AG who resisted investigation into his own criminal behavior. We've gone through rocky times before. Will we survive? I don't know.

Speaking of Wilson and his successors, John Edgar Hoover, who founded the FBI, knew to be personally loyal (or appear to be) to his President. Trump doesn't want to eliminate corruption in the FBI. He wants a J. Edgar Hoover, who will prosecute his enemies and protect him. In Russia the Prosecutor General, (formerly Chaika) has that role. In the USA the jobs were separated between the AG and FBI Director. Trump Wants his Hoover.

Sunday, February 2, 2020

Unearned Income vs Earned Income

My friend Rick Lemarr writes ( my [] contain comments) with:

“More proof that the neoliberals, libertarians, anarcho-capitalists, etc. [Pirates & privateers] who have infiltrated the Georgist movement are wrong.”

What he calls “neoliberals, libertarians & anarcho-capitalists” I label simply as privateers. The reason is that the arguments they use, referred to as “economic-royalism” by FDR in the 30s and 40s, valorize selfishness, wealth and property in a way that devalues labor and justifies asset stripping and usurpation of private wealth. Henry George, an economist from the 19th century, developed a school of economics which addressed unearned income starting by explaining that nature's bounty is a common property of all of us and so vital a right, that it should not be an absolute one. He made the distinction by talking about how people have “property in” land, in the product of their labor and capital. And how the person who owns capital as wealth, rather than tools he/she him/herself is using, ought to acknowledge the “property in” rights of workers. Henry George was a champion of the renter over the rentier, and he didn't exclude capitalists from his argument. That is a mistreatment of his writings.

He quotes H. George here:

“Interest from capital, or "capital yield" does not” [should not] “belong to the owner of the capital, or to “capital as capital,” but only to the USER of capital.”

This meditation is part of a series of posts on capital and labor:

The Fraud of Renting Labor
That Muddlehead Marx

Important Matters

Henry George Was explaining some important matters:

“Observe, again: It is not, as is carelessly stated by some writers, the increased efficiency given to labor by the adaptation of capital to any special form or use which fixes this maximum, but the average power of increase which belongs to capital generally. The power of applying itself in advantageous forms is a power of labor, which capital as capital cannot claim nor share.”

What “Labor Comes Before Capital” means

Abraham Lincoln understood this point when he said that “labor comes before capital” is an ontological distinction. That is labor by definition creates capital. Not the other way, except to the extent that capital goods might labor unguided, which would be an entirely new can of worms. Thus the user of capital has a natural interest in the product of that capital. At the same time the presence or absence of capital and raw materials creates the thresholds for production of food and services necessary to the well being and survival of both labor and those rentiers who style themselves capitalists. The following examples illustrate:

“A bow and arrows will enable an Indian to kill, let us say, a buffalo every day, while with sticks and stones he could hardly kill one in a week; but the weapon maker of the tribe could not claim from the hunter six out of every seven buffaloes killed as a return for the use of a bow and arrows; nor will capital invested in a woolen factory yield to the capitalist the difference between the produce of the factory and what the same amount of labor could have obtained with the spinning wheel and hand loom.”

An Inalienable right or Interest in Capital

Labor has an inalienable right to property in, “Interest” the capital goods it uses

“William when he borrows a plane from James does not in that obtain the advantage of the increased efficiency of labor when using a plane for the smoothing of boards over what it has when smoothing them with a shell or flint. The progress of knowledge has made the advantage involved in the use of planes a common property and power of labor. What he gets from James is merely such advantage as the element of a year’s time will give to the possession of so much capital as is represented by the plane.”

Custodial versus Use Property

One can think of capitalists as the custodians of capital. They govern a set of (one or more) properties, that they employ others to use to produce wealth and services in return for exchange. The people who use capital have an interest in that capital as well. Something owners often pretend not to be the case. To hear the creators of giant monopolies like Amazon or Facebook tell it sometimes, labor and users had nothing to do with their creations. They did it all themselves. They will claim that a contract can legally quit completely the ownership of the person who created a thing or used a tool to create with. That that kind of sweat equity is inalienable is demonstrated by the effects that such attitudes, laws and contract enforcement have on creators, users and employees. A person has a natural interest in his or her associations. And that interest is tied to the fundamental inalienable right to pursue happiness. Stealing wages may be legal (hence my term privateering), but is oppression and inequity. Catch 22 contracts may be legal, but they are still unjust.

Fair Treatment is a Basic Human Right

Economists like Ernst Wigforss, Keynes, and post-marxists profit from this basic human rights argument because it doesn't rely on demonizing capitalists or making workers into heroes. It's not inevitable that workers should "seize the means of production." There is a role for management and private government of business, as long as it is done respecting the interests of those being governed. This is also why Keynes and Wigforss were successful when Marxists like Lenin, Stalin, Trotsky and Mao were not. It is easy to use sloganeering to talk about everyone being equal. But a persons interest in capital is specific and most competencies are too. A man who can wield a blowtorch, has the same basic ability to use reason as the man wielding a pen, but they have specialized. Thus it is appropriate for the man wielding a blowtorch to be consulted and have a say in how the company employing him and his blowtorch are used, and the society that employs the company. But he usually doesn't even want to run the company or the country. Just fair treatment related to his interest in it. It is fair treatment that is the basic human right. And workers have a basic right to their share of capital interest. What goes to the company managers and nominal owners is derivative of their labor. As Henry George noted, a certain amount reflects “the labor of intendancy.” The rest is unearned.

Marx came up with broad generalizations and advocated for revolution that would somehow put workers in charge of running their own businesses and specified that eventually the state would melt into anarchy. This never made sense. It is why H. George could refer to Karl Marx as "that muddlehead." I think many of his modern “disciples” could be described as equally muddleheaded. That is why Ellerman, said:

“Marx, Lenin, and the Russian Revolution have set back the Left for over a century. More like a century and a half. [Talk-PDF]

The point is that income from sales of a thing or service, produced by “mixing labor with capital”, for example operating a dentist drill to fill a tooth cavity, belong primarily to the dentist, or other person operating the thing. Henry George would not want to expropriate property belonging to one dentist borrowed by another. But he would have been fine with taxing the "interest" from that capital appropriated from a hired dentist and not paid to him. Because unearned interest is really a form of economic rent.

Earned Interest

Still technically both the dentist using the drill, and the dentist who bought it, have an interest in that drill, or more importantly, in the revenue from charging the patient for a dental procedure. That interest from labor is a basic right because the laborer otherwise is denied full value and sufficient resources for his/her own survival. The interest from capital is also a right, but not an inalienable one. It is to be protected as long as it is reused as capital to fix, update or replace drills, keep the shop open and pay the dentists. It is property in capital acquired by sweat equity. It is also "interest" in capital. Income from capital and labor are so important that labor compensation should be privileged in taxation and capital reused as capital as well. Additionally things like retirement compensation and savings represent earned income for those who were privately taxed and/or provided the savings. A soldier has an inalienable interest in the country he fights for. A worker an inalienable interest in the business he works for. Denying such interest is a wrong, even when corrupt laws protect it. Hence my term privateering for the behaviors labeled "capitalism" by unscrupulous actors. And as Ellerman and Wigforss maintained, these are basic rights.

Unearned income and interest

Conversely when a person (or private government corporation) employs workers, the employer has a legitimate interest in the income from the capital he/she protects. That interest ought to be protected by the tax code as capital goods require constant replacement, refreshment & maintenance. But since not all of it is earned by the labor of the capitalist, not all of it deserves complete protection. And much of the value of an enterprise comes from labor. When such interest is sold or taken out as loot, it becomes unearned rental income and an unearned interest in the enterprise. It should be taxed progressively.

Henry George, Progress and Poverty (1879), Book 3, Chapter 5, Paragraph 3, The Law of Interest

https://www.facebook.com/groups/CommonWealthTax/permalink/2664655990314194/

Sources and Related Posts and Articles
http://www.ellerman.org/category/main-blog/
http://www.ellerman.org/neo-abolitionism-and-marxism/
http://www.ellerman.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Munich-neo-abolitionist-Talk.pdf

Friday, January 31, 2020

Dear Lamar Alexander

Dear Lamar Alexander

cc: Senator Lindsey Graham
Senator Chuck Grassley
Senator Michael S. Lee
Senator Ted Cruz
Senator Ben Sasse
Senator Joshua D. Hawley
Senator Thom Tillis
Senator Joni Ernst
Senator Mike Crapo
Senator John Kennedy
Senator Marsha Blackburn
Senator Joe Manchin
Senator Shelley Capito

As you note in your tweets:

“There is no need for more evidence to prove that the President asked Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, he said this on television on October 3, 2019, and during his July 25 2019, telephone call with the President of Ukraine”

And you concede that:

“...the president withheld United States aid, at least in part, to pressure Ukraine to investigate the Bidens”

You admit there is a:

“mountain of overwhelming evidence.“ he did so!

You concede that the President “inappropriately” ordered his entire administration to obstruct testimony, beyond legitimate assertions of executive privilege. You conceded in your argument that “such behavior undermines the principle of equal justice under the law” But it also undermines the power of congress, including the Senate, to investigate and oversee the functions of the Executive, which is a duty and constitutional prerogative of the Legislature. So it's not “ However it is not a “frivolous” infraction. It is a gross abuse of executive power and one that if you let be a precedent, will undermine the power of your own office.

The refusal to cooperate is Abuse of power

If obstruction of justice, lying to congress, violations of law aren't impeachable, and the President doesn't have to cooperate with Congressional subpoenas, then you might as well go home, because the senate is now superfluous.

Worse, letting Trump off for his abuses of power, when he is clearly aiming to trump up charges against anyone who crosses him and is trying to rule by dictat. If that is not impeachable. You'd better watch out for when he turns his wrath on you.

The reason we can't wait on the election, is that that the abuse of power includes efforts to corrupt the coming election, covertly violate campaign finance laws, commit wire fraud and vote counting fraud.

Truth matters. Get additional testimony. Get testimony from John Bolton. Don't let this nascent dictator off. Your own reputation is on the line.

Don't be a coward.

Chris Holte

Monday, January 20, 2020

Giving Bribery First Amendment Coverage

It is even worse than we thought

Normalizing and Legalizing Political Corruption

I'm an amateur at law and constitutional scholarship. For most of my life the Supreme Court of the USA, (SCOTUS), was like a rock to me. You could rely on it, mostly, to uphold the spirit as well as the letter of the law and constitution. Those laws have been chipped away, again, over the past 20+ years by a corrupt Supreme Court and now we are seeing the consequences.

We've gotten so used to bribery in all its forms that we've redefined it, parsed it, normalized it and made it legal. The fact is that campaign donations, even when indirectly connected to seeking private, separate advantage, are tied to bribery as envisioned by the Founders.

In the context of what is happening now with Trump's impeachment trial, it is even worse than I thought at the time. The Supreme Court at this point is corrupt, they have legalized undue influence and improper access and as a result most forms of bribery. Now we are seeing the Senate cede power (Power of the Purse, and now impeachment power) to the President that are part of the checks intended on the Presidency. It is no joke that we are really close to becoming a dictatorship.

The corrupt Bush V Gore decision

My faith was shaken in Bush V Gore, when the Supreme Court over-ruled a state constitution on a specious and "one-time" basis, outside its constitutional mandate, to select George W. Bush as President #43. It was a corrupt and badly decided case. First they stayed a recount of votes that would have given the election to Al Gore. Then they used the results of that stoppage to give the election to George W. Bush, with disastrous consequences for the country and Supreme Court. And finally they were overstepping their authority as, elections are in the purview of States according to the constitution. But that decision was just the beginning of a slide.

More:

Bush V Gore

Citizens United legalized Bribery

Citizens United took the cake. The Supreme Court went from Bush V Gore on to make even worse decisions. In Citizens United, they decided that improper access and undue influence were not subject to regulation and were not necessarily corrupting, and went on from their to give money gifts, bribes!!! first amendment protection!

Indirect Bribery and Extortion = Undue Influence and improper Access

Tuesday, January 14, 2020

Operation Condor, Exporting Fascism to South America

The Chilling Homage of South American Fascism to Mussolini and Hitler

I never connected Spanish Fascism (Falangism) with what went on in Latin America, directly, until recently. Now I see that the linkage was intentional. Mussolini and Hitler helped General Franco cross the Mediterranean from "Spanish Morocco" in 1936 at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War and shortly after José Antonio Primo De Rivera was executed for Treason, execution, gun running and assorted other Crimes. Years later Augusto Pinochet organized a condominium of terrorist intelligence agencies to fight a war against liberal democracy in the "Southern Cone," Cono-sur of South America. Both Operations were refered to as "Operation Condor."

See My post:
The Death of Primo De Rivera, for more. (Contains links)

Hitler's Operation Condor and the Condor Legion

Franco took over leadership of Primo De Rivera's Falange but faced a major problem. All his loyal Troops, Spanish and Native, were in North Africa and the Republicans controlled Spain. So he asked for help from Hitler and Mussolini. And he got it. Hitler named the air Assistance the "Condor Legion", Sparticus reports:

“On 27th July, 1936, Adolf Hitler sent the the Nationalists 26 German fighter aircraft. He also sent 30 Junkers 52s from Berlin and Stuttgart to Morocco. Over the next couple of weeks the aircraft transported over 15,000 troops to Spain. The fighter aircraft soon went into action and the Germans suffered their first losses when airmen Helmut Schulze and Herbert Zeck were killed on 15th August.” [Spartacus]

This Airlift was referred to as Operation Condor.

“In September 1936, Lieutenant Colonel Walther Warlimont of the German General Staff arrived as the German commander and military adviser to General Francisco Franco. The following month Warlimont suggested that a German Condor Legion should be formed to fight in the Spanish Civil War.” [Spartacus]

The Germans would provide air Support for the Francoist Troops and pummel the entire country. Famously they practiced terror bombing tactics as well.

“The initial force consisted a Bomber Group of three squadrons of Ju-52 bombers; a Fighter Group with three squadrons of He-51 fighters; a Reconnaissance Group with two squadrons of He-99 and He-70 reconnaissance bombers; and a Seaplane Squadron of He-59 and He-60 floatplanes.” [Spartacus]

Joint Operations of Hitler and Mussolini

Mussolini sent his entire Air force and 45,000 Troops. Franco's Spain was to be Catholic Fascism. There was no need for amity between Lutherans and Catholics, as Hitler sought. Mussolini's secular model was part of the reason that Mussolini eventually fell from grace. When he lost the support of Catholics, Hitler had to invade Italy to try to keep him in power. Franco stayed in power til 1975 when he died of old age.

Operation Condor and the "Southern Cone" - Cono Sur

Operation Condor from Wikipedia

Operation Condor was an intelligence condominium that allowed dictatorships across the South of South America to hunt down dissidents who had fled their countries and were living in neighbors. Tens of thousands of people were killed. It was organized by Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet was the only Latin American dictator to attend Francisco Franco's funeral in 1975. The New Yorker says about Pinochet:

“Like Franco, Pinochet is an ultra-conservative Catholic nationalist, a military officer with an unremarkable personality who suddenly rose to prominence.”

And both versions of Fascism were a war of Authoritarian Fanatic Catholics against “atheists” and “socialists,” with Atheist meaning anyone who didn't accept the “One True Faith” version of Christianity and Catholicism and “socialist” including democrats, liberals, progressives and anyone who didn't accept the assertion that charity is only the job of the Corporate Church and its organs.

Like Franco's invasion of Spain, Operation Condor was a “Mop Up Operation” as victims and enemies of Right Wing Catholic regimes were taking refuge in Argentina and other countries from the totalitarianism of right wing dictators across the Spanish Speaking lands. It was planned over at least a 2 year period beginning with a Conference of American Armies held in Caracas on 3 September 1973, where Brazilian General Breno Borges Fortes, head of the Brazilian army, proposed to

“extend the exchange of information” between various services in order to “struggle against subversion.” [Condor Explained]

A year later, In March 1974, representatives of the police forces of Chile, Uruguay and Bolivia met with Alberto Villar, deputy chief of the Argentine Federal Police and co-founder of the Triple A death squad, to implement cooperation guidelines. Their goal was to destroy the "subversive" threat represented by the presence of thousands of political exiles in Argentina. These exiles had fled the other country to Peronist Argentina.

Apparently the first step involved overthrowing Juan Perón (a second time) or his successor. Perón wouldn't die until July 1974, but he was ill and he'd been taking in refugees. When he died his wife but Isabel Perón took over, and became the new target.

Operation Condor was formally initiated in November 1975 during a meeting at in Santiago Chile.

“Founded by the Pinochet regime in November 1975, Operation Condor was the codename for a formal Southern Cone collaboration that included transnational secret intelligence activities, kidnapping, torture, disappearance and assassination, according to the National Security Archive's documentary evidence from U.S., Paraguayan, Argentine, and Chilean files.” [NSArchive2]

His wife tried to take over, but Isabel Perón's term ended abruptly on 24 March 1976, during a military coup d'état. A military junta, headed by General Jorge Videla, took control of the country, establishing the self-styled National Reorganization Process and implementing Operation Condor in Argentina.

I learned about Operation Condor a long time ago. But I married someone who was from Argentina and had barely survived it. And I learned hair singing details starting in the late 1990s from her and her friends. The targets were Jews, Arabs, unorthodox Catholics, Leftists, Socialists, Liberals and Democrats. And it was a very radical right Dominionist operation.

But the name is no accident. The people who code named Operation Condor, knew about Hitler's Condor Legion and approved of Franco. Indeed it is no accident that Operation Condor was formally initiated the same month (November 1975) that Francisco Franco died.

It is that fact that sent shivers up and down my spine, and led me to write this post.

As usual I have a lot more to say. But others are saying some of it better. Also my keyboard is going haywire, so I'll close with some links:

Further Reading

https://www.rightwingwatch.org/report/potus-shield-trumps-dominionist-prayer-warriors-and-the-prophetic-order-of-the-united-states
Chrissy Stroop on Franklin Graham's Fascism:
What Franklin Really means

I'm going to have to start writing about religion again.

This is the most recent in a series of posts

When I reviewed Jonah Goldberg's book "Liberal Fascism" I noted:

“the Fascism of the Mediterranean was that of Salazar in Portugal, Franco in Spain and Mussolini in Italy, and all three were heavily influenced by Rerum Novarum.”

I was noting that Jonah Grudgingly acknowledged this:

“It’s revealing that corporatism has many of its roots in Catholic doctrine. The 1891 papal encyclical Rerum novarum proposed corporatism or syndicalism in response to the dislocations of the Industrial Revolution. ... The Church’s interest in corporatism stemmed from its belief that this was the best way to revive medieval social arrangements that gave man a greater sense of meaning in his life.” [Liberal Fascism page 297]

Jonah Goldberg's book in 2009 alarmed me because he was doing rewrites of history as propaganda, and claiming that Mussolini and Hitler were both leftists. This was alarming because the only possible ulterior motive for making such claims was to distract and deflect from Right Wing Fascism. The Prospect review goes into detail about how much cutting, pasting and deleting he had to do to make his case. As I noted in my review:

“Jonah and other modern conservatives are rewriting the record to separate the Fascism of Salazar and Pinochet, Mussolini and Franco, of Catholic Action from it's equal partners in the Falange and the Fascist movement. Yes the two movements were parallel. One was focused on Social Issues and power. The other on Power. Together they were indomitable. If they had some divergent goals, most of their goals were convergent.”

And now we are seeing the forces of Exploitive, Manipulative, Amoral and Dishonest people and Religious Zealotry again. Fascism is alive and well. Dominionism and Racist Reconstructionist Evangelicalism, fascism, are raising their ugly heads once more. And we are in real trouble.

Sources and References

Background to Spain and Fascism

Like I said before, I started reading Garcia Lorca to divert from current events. My bad.

The Life of Garcia Lorca and Fascist Spain
Garcia Lorca and Charlie Chaplin
Falangist Fascism and Terror Versus Garcia Lorca
The Death of Garcia Lorca
Posts in this series on Fascism
Parallels between Falangists and the American Right wing
Right Wing Imperialism, & Myth Making
Right Wing Explicit Authoritarianism and Totalitarianism
Right Wing National Syndicalism and Corporatism
Right Wing Land Reform and Privatization
Right Wing Chauvinism and Indoctrination
Right Wing Violent Revolution And Dictatorship
Parallels between Falange fascists and US Fascists on Abortion
Posts Related to Franco and Fascism
Subsidiarity Versus Fascism [Oddly I wrote this before the Rise of Trumpism]
Prospect review of Liberal Fascim
https://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0767917189
Sparticus Reference: Condor Legion page
Underhanded ways Franco Aided Hitler, Franco would rebrand as an Anti-Communist by wars end.
PBS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CMBj7RuKWnI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DROhzLVazL0
Condor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Condor
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1998/10/19/the-dictator-2
https://mondediplo.com/2001/08/12condor
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB514/
Dominionism and Religious Right Wing Movements
Who Stole My Religion?: Revitalizing Judaism and Applying Jewish Values to Help Heal Our Imperiled Planet

Wednesday, January 8, 2020

Texas, Cowboys and New Orleans Pirates

Texas, Cowboys and New Orleans Pirates

Pirates and Privateers, Texas and New Orleans

When we think of pirates we picture them with eye patches, bandanas and at sea. We often see them as having no connection to anything in our own times or outside the world's oceans. But there is a direct connection between:

Offshoots of Piracy

  • Pirates and colonialism,
  • Piracy and Organized Crime,
  • Piracy and the Slave Trade,
  • Piracy and Slavery,
  • Piracy and Modern Navies,
  • Piracy and Lawyers, Courts,
  • Piracy and Corporate Business

And on a more humorous note:

  • Between Piracy and Cowboys

This Post Talks about Pirates and Cowboys

Tuesday, January 7, 2020

Pirates and Democracy

It is easy to get confused about the founders. They worked together to create the constitution, but North and South never really understood each other well. Philadelphia, Boston, and New York formed one axis. But the other axis stretched from Georgia to Virginia. They joined to fight the British. Without Unity, there would have been no United States and the States of the North would have gone from Colonies to neo-colonies and never escaped oppression. That unity was formed around economic, cultural and familial ties. But it also was formed around a willingness to embrace the concepts of Federalism, Democratic Republicanism, commonwealth and Democracy.

Multiple Influences

Some of those principles came from history and philosophers. But some of the sources were more intimate. Formal influences came from experience with the Dutch, the Swiss, Italian City States & Ancient Greece. They also came from enlightenment writers. But additional experience was informed by our own maritime history with piracy and privateering, conscription and militias. And our experience with neighbors like our own Indigineous.

Federation and the Indigineous

The Indigenous practiced forms of Democracy and Federation, that may have influenced the formation of our country. Politifact quotes Jon W. Parmenter's The Edge of The Woods: Iroquoia, 1534-1701:

“It is highly probable that Anglo-Americans during the revolutionary era looked to Haudenosaunee governance as a model of a successful collective polity, and borrowed elements of Haudenosaunee practice in developing revolutionary American constitutional governments,”

Politifact also cites a speech given in 1744, by Canassatego, an Onondaga chief, to representatives from Pennsylvania, Maryland and Virginia at a treaty conference in Lancaster, Pa.:

“We heartily recommend Union and a good Agreement between you our Brethren,...Never disagree, but preserve a strict Friendship for one another, and thereby you, as well as we, will become the stronger. Our wise Forefathers established Union and Amity between the Five Nations; this has made us formidable; this has given us great Weight and Authority with our neighbouring Nations. We are a powerful Confederacy; and, by your observing the same Methods our wise Forefathers have taken, you will acquire fresh Strength and Power; therefore whatever befalls you, never fall out one with another.”

However, it wasn't Democracy that made the Iroquois so powerful it was the concepts of Federation. The viral meme about the Iroquois conflates Democratic, Republican and Federation principles. The “E Pluribus Unum” concept is what the Iroquois were talking about and what Benjamin Franklin and others was referencing with his famous and somewhat brutal quote that if the Iroquois:

“capable of forming a Scheme for such a Union," then the new nation of European origin should be able to as well.”

So the idea of Democracy was not central to the indigineous influence on our founders. They were worried about what happens when States start out in disunity; they go to war. Federation is about avoiding and mitigating conflict.

“The concept [of Federation is] based on peace and consensus rather than fighting."

Pirates and Democracy

I've found compelling evidence that Robert and Governeuer Morris were pirates. And Hamilton was not perfect either. But I've also found evidence they were nationalists, just as patriotic as the Southerners, abolitionists and wanted a unified nation not a confederacy. His work with Madison and Jefferson gave us a Strong nation that still survives.

Had we been a loose confederacy, the Civil war would have started sooner and never ended. Fractured states are subject to external predation, colonialism and neo-colonialism.
Hamilton wanted direct election of the President. He was able to stop the Congress from making the selection of the President by the State Governors or Congress, but the Electoral College was a compromise with Southern Politicians who did not want popular sovereignty.
He also gave us a strong independent judiciary, which has saved us, even when it has been somewhat corrupt at times. As we can see right now, a Judiciary subject to executive and legislature, in the hands of a corrupt factional legislation and executive, would be the death knell of our Republic.
The General Welfare clause has allowed our country to serve its people instead of its oligarchs.
And Morris was the loudest, and pretty much the solo, voice against slavery at the Convention. Had he been listened to we might have avoided the Civil War.

So these fellows, who in some ways were pirates, learned some of their appreciation for liberty from that. Robert Morris ran a pirate fleet during the Revolution. Like I said, pirates tended to be more democratic. Privateers, not so much. As I've noted before Thom Paine also learned something about democracy from crewing on Privateers. The ones that treated people fairly also operated more democratically -- and more like free pirate ships.

Just some thoughts from an article I've been reading.

Links and sources