You’re right. How to explain that? Rank stupidity is all I can come up with. I mean a complete inability to link simple cause and effect. It gives me a headache thinking about it.
And yet, the concept of universal suffrage anywhere, anytime, is so sacrosanct that the west would rather die gurgling in it’s own erroneous effluent rather than even have a conversation about it.
I’ve been in southeast Louisiana all my life. My family (and my mother’s) emigrated in the late nineteenth century from Sicily into the port of New Orleans. God willing I’ll never leave here. I grew up enjoying the unbelievable fishery in the whole area, and hunting back when I still did that. I raised family here and was educated here. Lived a life here. If I were anymore a part of this area with it’s people, and it’s culture, and it’s way of life, I’d have roots growing from the bottom of my feet into the spongy ground of a big river delta.
I love the place. Just like Texans love their Texas and their identity and way of life. And how you feel about the great state of Arizona. It’s a good thing, a natural thing. If I might, it’s the application of subsidiarity to a good nationalism.
And yet, someone who shows up five minutes ago, who has no idea what it means to be an Arizonan, or what the land is like or the people are like, and who is completely indifferent to the whole area, the people and it’s culture, has just as much political input into the fabric of the state that you love and are part of as you do, simply because he showed up.
To me it’s crazy. People have a right to preserve the communities they’ve built, lived in and loved, and are invested in. for the time being there are still some restrictions on people who are new to the USA not being able to participate in the political process immediately. The restrictions go nowhere near far enough in my opinion and the usual suspects even want those eliminated. That same concept ought to be extended right down to the municipal level in my opinion.
Let Mayberry be Mayberry, so to speak. And if a bunch of carpetbaggers fall in love with the town and move there en masse, they’ll have to live there for a certain period of time (years) before they can vote in local elections or run for local office.
Universal suffrage is nothing short of national suicide. Earning the right to vote should be as difficult as earning citizenship to a new country. It should require demonstrating a proficiency in civics and economics, and a firm grasp of history. Voters should be tested periodically, say every other election cycle. The test should be a long and challenging examination that requires study and preparation, and your test score should represent the percentage of a vote you get. If you barely pass with a score of 70, you cast 70% of a vote. Anything below a 70 is failing grade, try again in four years (three consecutive failing grades and you’re a permanent non-voter).
If we held voters to a standard commensurate with the grave responsibility of voting — we’re talking about the power over life, death, and liberty here — we wouldn’t have to worry about carpetbaggers. The worst of them would be never bother to get their voting licenses anyway.
I often wonder if not etching voting standards in stone was an oversight by the Founders, or if they intentionally left us enough rope to hang ourselves. I suspect it’s the latter. The whole “if you can keep it” thing…. That’s just how those guys rolled.
Thanks for you excellent post. Agreed with every word it.
The entire concept of not creating that which you are running from is completely lost on these people.
Sigh… it was a nice seven years here.
You’re right. How to explain that? Rank stupidity is all I can come up with. I mean a complete inability to link simple cause and effect. It gives me a headache thinking about it.
And yet, the concept of universal suffrage anywhere, anytime, is so sacrosanct that the west would rather die gurgling in it’s own erroneous effluent rather than even have a conversation about it.
I’ve been in southeast Louisiana all my life. My family (and my mother’s) emigrated in the late nineteenth century from Sicily into the port of New Orleans. God willing I’ll never leave here. I grew up enjoying the unbelievable fishery in the whole area, and hunting back when I still did that. I raised family here and was educated here. Lived a life here. If I were anymore a part of this area with it’s people, and it’s culture, and it’s way of life, I’d have roots growing from the bottom of my feet into the spongy ground of a big river delta.
I love the place. Just like Texans love their Texas and their identity and way of life. And how you feel about the great state of Arizona. It’s a good thing, a natural thing. If I might, it’s the application of subsidiarity to a good nationalism.
And yet, someone who shows up five minutes ago, who has no idea what it means to be an Arizonan, or what the land is like or the people are like, and who is completely indifferent to the whole area, the people and it’s culture, has just as much political input into the fabric of the state that you love and are part of as you do, simply because he showed up.
To me it’s crazy. People have a right to preserve the communities they’ve built, lived in and loved, and are invested in. for the time being there are still some restrictions on people who are new to the USA not being able to participate in the political process immediately. The restrictions go nowhere near far enough in my opinion and the usual suspects even want those eliminated. That same concept ought to be extended right down to the municipal level in my opinion.
Let Mayberry be Mayberry, so to speak. And if a bunch of carpetbaggers fall in love with the town and move there en masse, they’ll have to live there for a certain period of time (years) before they can vote in local elections or run for local office.
What an excellent comment JTLiuzza…and beautifully written. Concur.
Universal suffrage is nothing short of national suicide. Earning the right to vote should be as difficult as earning citizenship to a new country. It should require demonstrating a proficiency in civics and economics, and a firm grasp of history. Voters should be tested periodically, say every other election cycle. The test should be a long and challenging examination that requires study and preparation, and your test score should represent the percentage of a vote you get. If you barely pass with a score of 70, you cast 70% of a vote. Anything below a 70 is failing grade, try again in four years (three consecutive failing grades and you’re a permanent non-voter).
If we held voters to a standard commensurate with the grave responsibility of voting — we’re talking about the power over life, death, and liberty here — we wouldn’t have to worry about carpetbaggers. The worst of them would be never bother to get their voting licenses anyway.
I often wonder if not etching voting standards in stone was an oversight by the Founders, or if they intentionally left us enough rope to hang ourselves. I suspect it’s the latter. The whole “if you can keep it” thing…. That’s just how those guys rolled.
Thanks for you excellent post. Agreed with every word it.