OPEN BORDERS, CORPORATE ELITISM, AND GOVERNMENT EXCESS EMBRACE ‘SOCIAL DARWINISM’

1
142

Hence the great American Preamble to the United States Constitution reads as follows.

“We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”
(see preamble to United States Constitution;https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/preamble)

The Preamble to the American Constitution was formulated by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia Constitution in the summer of 1776 as so stated in the following statement by Encyclopedia Britannica.

“The Constitution was written during the summer of 1787 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, by 55 delegates to a Constitutional Convention that was called ostensibly to amend the Articles of Confederation (1781–89), the country’s first written constitution. The Constitution was the product of political compromise after long and often rancorous debates over issues such as states’ rights, representation, and slavery.”
(Citation https://www.britannica.com/topic/Constitution-of-the-United-States-of-America)

Contrary to some thinking the Preamble to the American Constitution maintains the specific intent and manifests the general spirit by which our founding fathers created the venerated and sacred governing document of the American republic.

In part, the preamble reads, “We the People of the United States, in order to…establish justice (and)…promote the general welfare…” the union was established utilizing the Constitution of the United States. The preamble to our American Constitution should and ought to be the guiding light of the American Constitution in ordaining, establishing and legislating laws for the common people of the United States.

The Constitution does not mandate a plan to propagate the “domestic tranquility” of foreign states, but rather specifies mandates the tranquility and welfare of the American people. This means utilizing the force of the sovereign to create and legislative environment to encourage affordable health care for the American people.

The preamble also manifests the intent that the general spirit and goals of Congress should be to “establish justice” throughout the American republic. In terms, of “justice” for health insurance this means that not only corporate and government employees should not enjoy affordable health care, but also, working class, self-employed America should also have equal and just access and opportunity to maintain reasonable and affordable health care. If Congress does otherwise, they shall violate the manifest spirit of the preamble of the American Constitution setting aside the intent of the founding fathers.

Congress is infected by two polar opposite sides, whom place their personal political ideologies over practical solutions desperately needed regarding affordable health care for the largely self-employed American working class. And yet, while the American self-employed working class are drowning in health care expenses, costs and fees, corporate, congress and government employees are treated as royalty regarding affordable health care. Now posit the inquiry, is this justice? The pressures upon the honest working American self-employed middle class are overwhelming. The Clintonites and globalist allowed tremendous amounts of immigrants through American borders to take middle class jobs while at the same time corporate greed and congressional greed and avarice squeezed the American working self-employed to buckle under staggering health care costs.

Consider the following statement written by Thomas West, May 19, 2015, “ Poverty and Welfare in the American Founding”.

“These claims about the American past are either untrue or misleading. America has always had laws providing for the poor. The real difference between the Founders’ welfare policies and today’s is over how, not whether, government should help those in need. Neither approach has a monopoly on compassion. The question is: What policies help the poor, and what policies harm them?”
(Citation, http://www.heritage.org/poverty-and-inequality/report/poverty-and-welfare-the-american-founding)

The extreme liberal democrats view of a single social health program comes into violent conflict with the extreme right’s “social Darwinism”. Many in Congress among the conservative-Libertarian wing of congress either explicitly or implicitly embrace the Libertarian philosophy of “Social Darwinism”. Social Darwinism embraces open borders and unrestrained immigration, open and unfair trade, corporate excess and elitism and globalization. Social Consider the following definitions of Social Darwinism.

“Definition of social Darwinism: (Merriam Webster) : an extension of Darwinism to social phenomena; specifically : a sociological theory that sociocultural advance is the product of intergroup conflict and competition and the socially elite classes (such as those possessing wealth and power) possess biological superiority in the struggle for existence”
(see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/social%20Darwinism)

Social Darwinism (Dictionary.com) a 19th-century theory, inspired by Darwinism, by which the social order is accounted as the product of natural selection of those persons best suited to existing living conditions and in accord with which a position of laissez-faire is advocated. (see http://www.dictionary.com/browse/social-darwinism)

Social Darwinism, (Encyclopædia Britannica) the theory that human groups and races are subject to the same laws of natural selection as Charles Darwin had perceived in plants and animals in nature. According to the theory, which was popular in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the weak were diminished and their cultures delimited while the strong grew in power and in cultural influence over the weak. Social Darwinists held that the life of humans in society was a struggle for existence ruled by “survival of the fittest,” a phrase proposed by the British philosopher and scientist Herbert Spencer. (https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-Darwinism)

The Libertarian doctrine of “social Darwinism” often masquerades as a conservative precept, but is not true conservatism and radically violates the Spirit of the American Constitution as manifested in the Preamble to the American Constitution.

In fact and truth, the Libertarian concept of “social Darwinism”, which has infected Congress is the other side of the coin of liberal Globalism, open borders, open and unfair trade, government and corporate elitism (such as providing elite health benefits to government and corporate employees while impairing the general welfare and health care of the self-employed working class).

The American self-employed working middle classes should not allow congressional members masquerading as conservatives, but accepting corporate elitism, open borders, open trade and both explicit and implied libertarian social Darwinism to mislead Americans and implement a general policy of “social Darwinism”.

The concept of social Darwinism, which has infected many members of Congress only mimics true conservatism. However, genuine conservatism accepts nationalism which requires maintenance of the welfare and health of the American citizens.

This is contrary, to open border corporate and government elitism which embrace the doctrine of globalism. That is the ideology of a global labor market without borders or national regulation, wherein corporate and government elites choose from an international labor market. Thus, the government and corporate employees are provided with lavish health benefit packages while the independent self-employed American working middle class are refused affordable health care. Such a nefarious and evil doctrine is the essence of Libertarian open border social darwinism.

 

1 COMMENT

  1. Unfortunately the constitution is a dead letter and has been for years. The oligarchs will give lip service to certain doctrines and will use them as cover to do whatever they want, but the idea of the constitution being the supreme law of the land is long gone. The people of this country continue to be victimized by the banksters, the corporations,the glob-comms, and the turd-world vermin who are allowed to defile us. We are way beyond a political or even a peaceful solution to our dilemma where 3 percent of the population control 85 percent of the nation's wealth and where 77 percent of the population under the age of 18 is non-white. The struggle is no longer between conservatives and liberals or between democrats and republicans. The struggle is between national socialists and the glob-comms. Pick your side.

Leave a Reply