"For The People" (poem) >>> The Law, For It Whom?

in #poetry7 years ago (edited)

 

In my 50 years and 57 countries, there is one thing I've been convinced of beyond all others: That the "thin veneer of civilization" is just that ... thin. 

It's been a long haul since Athens. Making the Law has never been a problem. Keeping it .. has. 

Human beings are myopic. The most telling lesson of history, is that we don't learn from history. As Mark Twain reputedly said, "History never repeats itself, but it rhymes." We keep making the same mistakes.

The American Constitution

The American Constitution is an astonishing artifice of history. If one examines the historical records, one cannot be but amazed that it came about at all: Here's a Huffington Post account of one of the Founding Fathers' many outings: 

In 1787, two days before they signed off on the Constitution, the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention partied at a tavern. According to the bill preserved from the evening, they drank 54 bottles of Madeira, 60 bottles of claret, eight of whiskey, 22 of porter, eight of hard cider, 12 of beer and seven bowls of alcoholic punch. 

Despite a state of near-constant inebriation, they managed to cobble together the best ideas from millennium of fits and starts, and failed attempts, at Just Law. It wasn't perfect, but it was perfect enough to create the foundation of one of the most consequential countries in history. Of course, there was one imperfection so obvious that it could not, for long, go unaddressed.

To address it, America would eviscerate itself.

On a trip to Washington, D.C., I visited the Lincoln Memorial. On an interior wall is inscribed the words of Lincoln's 2nd Inaugural Address. I'd read it before, but something about reading it there, in that setting, brought tears to my eyes. 

Most people don't know it, but Lincoln was an avid reader of poetry, and an occasional poet as well. Long before I became a poet, I was a soldier. And, perhaps, for that reason, the words of that passage (in bold) hit me on both levels:

Wikipedia:

On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil war. All dreaded it, all sought to avert it. While the inaugural address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war—seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came. 

 And the war came. 

 When I listen to the hyperbole and vitriol of modern political discourse, I feel a sense of foreboding. 



Sort:  

I study law, but yes everytime i am made to believe that laws are for fools.
Law makes me believe in equality, but i fail to find even equity.
Law tells me that we have freedom, but then why my my freedom is curbed everytime!
If we are equals, then why barriers and discrimination on the name of religion, creed and gender.
Laws were supposed to govern human behavioir, then why do certain people govern the law.
So many whys, yet no answer to them.

Loading...

Humans have rights, persons have privligies.

In the rules for the contest was a condition that no simple congratulations and phrases apply. After reading the article, I realized that I would not have been able to write such a comment seriously. What I want out, I do not know if I understood it wrong or the post is meant ironically. But calling America a successful country is very contradictory, a country that wages more wars than any other where every third person is overweight and proud of being founded on millions of dead native Americans. OK. Designating a constitution as a trick is more appropriate when one speaks of the art of enslaving people. Please do not misunderstand me, I have nothing against the Americans, because the inhabitants of the "state" are not to blame, even if they decide to become a soldier to spread democracy, they are victims. Victim of a man-made system. This is not an American problem, please note that America was founded by "Europeans". However, I have to say that I have a huge respect for all the Americans trying to put an end to the game. And that's a few. Much more than in the small European countries. That's why I still put off my hat to all those who face the truth.

Greetings Montaquila

Loading...

Maybe you are right @quillfire
Hidden within subconscious there is an insatiable desire for conflict...war is inevitable...Its a necessary evil....
Look around you, the world is on fire.
War is not about to begin, It has already started...


From Zoroastrian point of view...
The war between good and evil had always been, ever since the inception of time...
So why avoid war???
Let it be the cleanser....
To grow something new, the field must be set on fire first!

Good points, but can we really say this in a modern context, war is actually becoming less likely as time goes on. Can we imagine France and Germany, or Spain and Portugal going to war? Not so long ago, the answer would have been yes, now it is no.

Cg

It depends, how you define war...
May be your definition is different from those living in Syria, Palestine or Kashmir.
And what about oppressive economic war being waged upon the people ever since the creation of US Federal Reserves. All of us, the crypto believers, are fighting this war.

@xabi,

It is not often one finds reference to Zoroastrian thought in modern political or philosophical discourse. So, thank you for the reference. While I'm familiar with the broad strokes of the Zoroastrian religion, I must plead ignorance of the details.

I am not one to ever encourage war. I've seen it, and would not wish it upon anyone or any place. With respect to your aforementioned comment, you're right ... there are many different kinds of war, figuratively speaking. Perhaps the word, coercion, better captures the intent of this discussion.

My rhetorical focus is not so much upon tank battalions (literally, war), but rather upon the preceding condition of social disharmony to the extent that nations become, essentially, dysfunctional (which, unfortunately, tends to result in tank battalions).

One of the challenges of the 21st Century will not be whether we can change each other's minds (difficult), but rather whether we can live with each other's differences (more difficult).

There's no assurance that we can.

But here's an interesting insight. Cryptogee created this challenge and very specifically instructed people to not only be honest ... but to be honorable. I have long believed that honor is the key to social harmony. He does not require that you agree with him, or me, about anything, but only that you engage in whatever the debate, honorably.

No making up your own facts so as to support your biases (which we all have). No engaging in ad hominem attacks, imputing moral turpitude upon others simply because they disagree with your political or philosophical opinions. Nobody calling others, "Nazis," unless they're actually sporting Swastikas.

If you look at the exchange or articles, comments and replies between Cryptogee and I, that resulted in this challenge, you will see that he and I disagree about some things relating to Artificial Intelligence and it's implications for humanity.

Nevertheless, it ought to be clear, that he and I grant each other enormous mutual respect. There is precisely nothing about our disagreement that would prevent us from being best friends. Quite to the contrary, steel sharpens steel ... it is precisely because neither of us can dominate the other ... that we are influencing each other.

Let that sink in.

I have to agree with you...
Mutual respect for one another is the key...Every body can have his own opinion and should be respected...
That's how civilized world works and there is nothing noble and civilized about war...

Now I read your piece and it was quite nice... But this line from Lincoln's speech that struck a chord:
Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.
Because that's precisely where my country finds itself... Leaders too old and inept to lead who you'll think after being led by the neck in chains and shipped off to suffer would finally alleviate at least a fraction of our problems... But no we the youths are left to our own devices in a country where suddenly snakes and monkeys can run off with sums most of the populace would never see in their lifetimes... And every tribe suddenly wants to have its own country, I don't understand how hard is it to fix your own shortcomings before first looking to lead others, how can hunger suddenly make one bloodthirsty and immune to reason... Well I don't understand politics but good thing I'm a poet would just keep wallowing in hunger writing for a nation that doesn't love itself much less it's people...

@jayo,

Read through some of my other other replies in reply to Nigerian comments:

Leaders too old and inept to lead who you'll think after being led by the neck in chains and shipped off to suffer would finally alleviate at least a fraction of our problems... But no we the youths are left to our own devices in a country where suddenly snakes and monkeys can run off with sums most of the populace would never see in their lifetimes...

As I have opined, no country can survive institutional corruption ... and Nigeria has a lot of it.

And every tribe suddenly wants to have its own country ...

Tribalism. People are defining themselves by their In-Groups. Not as individuals who have to earn respect through merit. You and I are both poets. What makes a great poem for you, is the same as it is for me, and it has nothing to do with your skin color, religion or tribe.

What makes our poems great, or not, is our respective ability to beautifully craft words that express an idea, ideal or insight ... that someone cares about. Nothing else makes a wit's worth of difference. Poetry is a meritocracy. And so is being an accountant or an architect or an engineer. Anytime someone gets a job or a promotion ... or gets elected ... based upon anything other than merit, it hurts Nigeria as a whole.

Tribal history, and having pride in one's roots, isn't a bad thing. I can trace my family lineage back almost 1,000 years. I am proud of my clan (I posted a poem about it, "From Whence That You Came:"

https://steemit.com/thealliance/@quillfire/thealliance-you-are-not-quite-desirable-for-our-society-my-response-from-whence-that-you-came-poem

to teach my daughter about the standards to which she and I are to hold ourselves. This is little different, in motivation, than the traditions and rituals than many Nigerians practice to celebrate their ancestral history.

But with, 200+ tribes, Nigeria is riven with competing interests that have nothing to do with, "What's best for the country?" Political Correctness stops people from speaking honestly and honorably about the issue as Post-Colonial Guilt has paralyzed White People from criticizing, or even critiquing, anything about Black People. But how do you think outside investors, with the capital Nigeria so desperately needs to develop, view this ever-shifting patchwork of competing alliances? "Instability, unpredictability, uncertainty ... RISK" ... are the words that come first to my mind.

If Nigeria (and many other African countries), wants to survive in the present, it will have to live in the present. And that means "Best Man/Woman for the Job" irrespective of tribal affiliation.

Great work here. I really like what you have put together and you elicit some stirring thoughts. Throughout the whole campaign in 2016 I watched with horror at what was going on between the candidates. There were many times I thought "this, this is what is going to make people realize he shouldn't be President". I knew I could be wrong though because also in the back of my head was this nagging feeling that people are okay with this. There are a lot of people that don't care or are willing to look past it. Then he was elected and all of the uproar began. People talking about how long it would take before he was impeached etc. My thoughts then were "you can't." Although he didn't win the popular vote, he won enough that if he were to be forced out, there would be civil war in our country. I don't have a fix for all of this, I wish I did. I think setting term limits and outlawing corporate lobbying would be a great start though. I think those things could be easily done without changing the heart of the Constitution. That is just my opinion though.

@bozz,

As a political centrist, I watched the unfolding of the 2016 election in something akin to incredulity. "These ... are the two choices?" I can't tell you how many times I heard someone say, "I don't want to vote for either one." In fact, although I wasn't keeping tabs, I'd guess 75% of the comments were in that vein.

My take on the election is that Trump was not chosen per se, nor was Clinton defeated per se.

I think the electorate chose sides in an underlying culture war.

Almost all the same issues that are dividing the US, are dividing the UK, Canada and Australia. They're also effecting much of western and eastern Europe. Despite having lived in the US for 26 years, I'm a Canadian citizen (Green Card) so I couldn't vote. But I talk as much politics as anyone, and more than most.

What I was struck by was the frequency of comments concerning things about which the politicians weren't talking, or at least, not to any great extent. One women called it Millennial Madness:

  1. The insanity of political correctness that has overtaken American universities (safe spaces and trigger warnings);
  2. The suppression of Freedom of Speech by the far-Left by no-platforming people with whom they disagree;
  3. Euphemisms and ad hominem attacks paralyzing the ability to engage is mainstream political discourse without being branded with a term connoting moral turpitude (misogynists, sexists, racists, homophobes, transphobes, bigots, fascists and, of course, Nazis);
  4. Identity politics and intersectionality at every turn;
  5. People on the Left wearing t-shirts openly supporting Marxism complete with Hammer & Sickle.

But here's the thing: Many of the aghast I spoke with were Democrats who voted for Obama both times! Center and center-left moderates. All were university-educated and several held advanced degrees. And, most voted for Trump or abstained from voting.

In my opinion, the inability, or unwillingness, of the far-Left to engage is civil and reasoned discourse is what lost them centrist swing-voters, and hence the election. Clinton and Trump were merely symbolic figureheads of a much deeper divide in the body politic.

I don't disagree with you on some of your points. You will probably be dismayed to know that I really wanted Bernie though. The two options offered were horrible and as much as they try to tell you voting independent is not throwing away your vote I think we all know the reality. Your comment about political correctness is spot on though. A quick glance at the comments on any Yahoo news story will show the divide and the ability of people these days to degrade any subject down to race or bias. I read a great article a while ago called The Wussification of America. I wish I could find it again to reference it. It was pretty telling. Thanks for the reply to my comment!

Technically it wasn't throwing away your (our) votes, because no matter what state you are from, a vote for Hilary would not have won her the election. I voted 3rd party, but my next best option was not voting, so I find it ironic that anyone would blame anything on third party voters. (Any blame must assume what would have been done if that third party vote was not cast, in my case, I would have not paid the postage to mail it in).

I think a little differently about US politics now that I live off continent, but I believe that the implied two-party system is one of the deep (unconstitutional) tap roots of the problems in the US.

@ecoinstant,

You know who was against political parties of any kind: George Washington. And John Adams. And Thomas Jefferson (until he threw in the towel prior to his own Presidency).

The Constitution was carefully designed to balance interests and loyalties. There is no provision for the "extra layer of loyalties" afforded to political parties. Indeed, getting away from political parties was one of the driving forces for choosing a Republic-style of democracy over a Parliamentarian one.

Although it won't happen, what I'd like to see is the leadership of the Republicans and Democrats get together and agree to, at the stroke of midnight, simultaneously disavow their respective looney-toon fringe elements. Drive the nutcases out of both parties. This way, both parties would be equally disadvantaged by the votes they'd lose, and hence the balance of power maintained.

We've got to get back to normal political discourse between the Center-Right and Center-Left ... sane Republicans and sane Democrats respectively.

@bozz,

Personally, I think Bernie had a bit of a math problem ... how to pay for all his ideas. (You might be surprised to learn that I, a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist, would support a National Healthcare system ... although I'd want some fixes first (Singapore has got an interesting model to study). Nevertheless, Bernie was the most honest and honorable person in the race, and honesty and honor go a long way with me.

The "political correctness police" are using PC as a tool of coercion and it's shutting down honest debate, the lifeblood of any democracy. The explosion of euphemism is an especially pernicious development. Once you control words, you control ideas.

Thanks for the great comment.

Meaningful poetry. Really this tells like the law was blunted up but very sharp down.
Even in my country it can be felt, the monarchs who have money can buy the law, even if it has been proven wrong he can still enjoy the world with calm, what kind of gold he has until the law was subject to him. Things like this make us angry at the state officials, so easy they sell justice for a little gold. I think every country has a rat like this now, it's like a public secret. Advice of the ancestors was ruled out, who cares that the country will be destroyed if the law does not learn from history, they know how to collect many treasures.
Many things happen on this earth, injustice becomes commonplace for the poor.
I did not know much about the American constitution, but I think historical deception does not only happen in America, but many countries feel it. When reading an article like this I feel completely useless, because it can only be silent.

@putroeal,

When reading an article like this I feel completely useless, because it can only be silent.

Putroeal, look at this post and it's comments and replies. By the end of this week, we may well have set a record for the longest and most numerous exchanges in the history of Steemit.

This is not silence.

We fix the world one piece at a time. It can be frustrating because the problems seem so large. But a large thing, broken into many smaller pieces, makes the burden more manageable, doesn't it?

The American Constitution is an example, despite its historical imperfections, of how countries can govern themselves. It was a stroke of genius, implemented by men unafraid of plagiarizing the past - learning from it, lessons.

Study it. Learn from it. Copy it.

Hopefully we can really fix this. I see if in the america his free society opinion without fear, but in my country it is very difficult, if there are netizens commented on social media offensive officials then the netizen could have in demand for smearing good name and others. I and probably other people have lost their minds with the law.

Hi, here is my two cents. As a nation we have a severe inability to work through conflict. This is exacerbated by two powerful political parties, which is pulling everything apart at the seams. It seems every corporate entity has an alliance with one of the two parties, and toes the party line. Many are just checking out of the news cycle, frustrated with the lack of objectivity. What if we passed a law to level the playing field politically?
I propose that every presidential election would have to involve at least three parties, and that for every dollar a specific candidate spends on election efforts, they would have to give a dollar to each of the other two candidates. In this way, a wealthy Donald Trump would have the same amount of money as Joe the Plumber. There are many worthy people who are not wealthy or connected to the wealthy. As for the conflict, we need to learn to disagree without demonizing each other and ad hominem attacks. I would welcome more debates, but debates where the microphone is CUT at the end of their time, the sound goes dead whether they are "done" or not. Perhaps a graphic on the screen could score the debate based on real debate rules, not just who fires the best insults. For all this the USA is still an amazing place to live. We have a lot to improve on, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

@giddyupngo,

As for the conflict, we need to learn to disagree without demonizing each other and ad hominem attacks. I would welcome more debates, but debates where the microphone is CUT at the end of their time, the sound goes dead whether they are "done" or not.

I would watch the debates JUST to see their mics get CUT!

For all this the USA is still an amazing place to live. We have a lot to improve on, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

That's the perfect attitude. I'm with you.

Thanks, your reply made me smile!

@nosmas,

Not to quibble, but Mark Twain is one of my literary heroes.

"History never repeats itself, but it rhymes."

I'm with Mark. :-)

History doesn't actually repeat,
but if you look closely it is repleat
with clear examples from all throughout time
showing how the human condition rhymes.

@ecoinstant,

BRAVO ... Sir! Bravo.

Although, I feel honor-bound to warn you ... this is how it starts.

First a quippy little poem on a post. Then, a few stanzas for your wife on your Anniversary. Your daughter gets straight A's ... well, since she put in the time, so will you.

Girls are suckers for a well-written poem and once you've set a precedent, they'll expect every time. And this is where Mission Creep kicks into over-drive: Now it's not just Anniversaries, but Birthdays, Mother's Day, Thanksgiving and Christmas. Ironically, you will be the only one who never receives a single poem in your entire life.

Before you know it, you'll be driving down the road while scribbling with your free hand, "butt-crack & roof-rack," because you haven't used them before ... and surely you'll be able to use them for something." Gotta stay fresh.

End-of-Year poems for the teachers, eulogies for the deceased ...

You have been warned! :-)

I am already getting sucked in! It's a lot of fun to find someone like you with 15 years of experience making rhymes, I have only been rhyming part-time for a few years, although now with steemit as a place to put them, I have been writing more.

Mission Creep; I never knew it affected poetry, but it does make a lot of sense. Your example about women is particularily apt, although all humans have 'floating' expectations that seem to pop up just above the prevailing water line, it's particularily noticeable when a man wants to keep impressing the same woman.

A job well done. LOL if I was @cryptogee I would reward this comment instantly. I sadly do not have the poetic skills (at least not that I am aware of) displayed here, and thus I will have to resort to other means of procuring myself some ❤️️ ...

@dialsamai,

Thanks mate. Practice makes perfect. It's taken me 15 years so far.

Well technically this isn't poetry, it's more like a political article. Still great by the way. Here have a worthless upvote.☺

@eddy2cul,

I'll take it where I can get it. :-)

The vitriol of anything even vaguely political is at a fever pitch. Even going back to the days before the Revolution, I think men were able to gather in the taverns and heatedly discuss and argue the pros and cons of revolution without as much animosity as felt even between a group of friends discussing politics today. There is zero tolerance for a dissenting opinion. Sadly, in the interest of keeping friendships, all things political must be given a wide berth.

Would you agree that the berth is even wider here than on the legacy platforms like Facebook and YouTube? - The reasons I see now is for friendship sake as you put it. I had assumed it was a profit margin (I am quite a cynic).

@trumanity,

Sir, I would encourage your skepticism ... I would discourage your cynicism.

@old-guy-photos is my Mentor. Without him, it is unlikely I would, after a month, still be on Steemit ... despite a philosophical inclination to "Never Surrender."

@old-guy-photos, (his name is Paul, and so is mine, and I encourage everyone to address me, and him, as so), has spent ridiculous amounts of time explaining to me the most rudimentary aspects of Steemit. If he doesn't think I'm a moron, he ought to.

As you can probably imagine, the length of my comments and replies, to say nothing of my posts, created daily bandwidth-freezes. Often, I could not post or respond until 3 PM in the afternoon. Unbidden, Paul simply delegated me 50 SP ... which solved the problem overnight. He's also the guy who connected me to Cryptogee.

What exactly he gets out of this, is still unclear to me. I wrote a comment to another such fellow, @C0ff33a, who Paul also introduced to me (and who is also a Paul protegee). I think you should read the article ... and my comments to it:

https://steemit.com/vlog/@c0ff33a/c0ff33-vlog-24th-february-2018-one-ring-to-rule-them-all

While you're at it (look for my comments ... this one's fun):

https://steemit.com/whysoserious/@old-guy-photos/of-flowers-and-beards

And this one's serious:

https://steemit.com/mmorpg/@fulltimegeek/steem-quest-1-or-slay-the-cave-troll

There is hope, so long as there are Good Men in the world. THERE ARE ... still Good Men in the world.

I think people here are somewhat forced to be civil. I have been active on YT where there is basically anonymity, and therefore anything goes. Of course on FB people are supposed to use their real identity. The prospect of flagging has a way of making people think twice before shooting off with their keyboards lol.

Ha! I never thought about the anonymity - that is probably a large factor. I wasn't thinking about plain youtube rudeness or trolling, just the expression of political opinion, though. It is very hard to find a political blog post trending here.