Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
In the Federalist Papers, men like Madison and Hamilton explored the virtues of a federalist republic and highlighted the dangers of true democracy.
In discussing the concept of the tyranny of the majority, Madison commenced the statement of his theory in Federalist 51 with an acknowledgment that the "have nots" in any society are extremely likely to attack the "haves," for like Hamilton the Virginian believed class struggle to be inseparable from politics.
"It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard against the oppression of its rulers," Madison writes, "but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest the rights of the minority will be insecure."
In a nutshell, this is what I see. As the present system stands, within the fellowship, a simple majority rules -- leaving few protections, checks and balances, for those with a minority view on any side. It demands uniformity yet is inequitable in its enforcement and relentless in policing compliance.
JMO, CS.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coonskinner
Relentless in policing compliance?
Daniel, thanks to distrrict officials who could care less, the AS is a joke.
Guys sign them every year who don't believ half the AoF, and nobody polices or enforces anything.
Don't make me laugh. 
That is a strawman. |
is it possible to agree with both of these views?
Daniel, this is one of your most thought full posts. the enforment aspect isnt necessarily there but clearly the UPCI has reached a point where factions are contending for that simple majority for the purpose of forcing the entire organization to be clones of one another. BOTH sides are engaged in this conflict and while Coonskinner is right about enforcement at the district level on the Infernal Document, Daniel has hit the nail on the head on what the problem is within membership.
Very thoughtful Daniel.