The Declaration of Independence states that we have a right to abolish our government, but our founding fathers did not provide a systematic and democratic way to abolish the government in Article V of our constitution, and that was a big mistake. Thomas Jefferson argued that we should have a new constitution about every 19 years. Also, with a new constitution, we could remove the embarrassing, out-dated references to slavery.
It has always deeply frustrated me that political writers and activists and third political parties never effectively unite together on anything! Either they can't agree on anything, or if they do agree, they only represent a fringe element in society. In a previous article of mine entitled "15 Proposals that Could Make our Nation and the World a Better Place," proposals that are based on what we need rather than what we want, I also mentioned 3 Demands that masses of Americans can agree on right now. Here are the 3 Demands:
1. We demand that corporations not be allowed to make contributions to political campaigns for presidential elections.
2. We demand that the political spectrum be broadened by equally empowering multiple national political parties, not just the Republicans and Democrats. The 7 largest national political parties must be represented in all presidential public debates that involve more than one political party in all future presidential elections.
3. We demand that all states that have not yet passed the National Popular Vote Initiative (NPVI) get on board and join the states that have. The NPVI is an interstate compact to effectively "abolish" the Electoral College without amending the constitution. States that join the compact agree to award their electoral votes not to the candidate who wins the state, but to the candidate who wins the national popular vote.
I sent emails to 11 third political parties to see which parties would support demanding that elected officials endorse the above 3 Demands or be voted out of office, when the movement in support of the demands grows exponentially. None of the political parties I sent emails to responded to my request, and it has now been over two weeks since I sent the emails. It may be that there are enough political organizations around the country that would encourage protest rallies focusing on just the above 3 Demands if third political parties do not want to initiate the process, but I have not sent emails to any political organizations in this regard.
But I now think the best political strategy is to not focus on getting a new constitutional amendment passed that revises Article V, nor is the best political strategy to get massive support of the 3 Demands. The best political strategy is to focus on getting a new constitution by having a Constitutional Convention in the democratic and orderly way described in this article.
Though some of the needed specific changes can be implemented without a constitutional amendment, and some require a constitutional amendment, in either case, it will take masses of dissidents working together on each of those single issues--a very time-consuming process. With a new constitution, however, we could solve several problems all at once.
My argument is that since there is a way to have a Constitutional Convention in a way that maximizes democracy, why not get political readers, writers, activists, political organizations, and citizens--from the right and the left--to support having a Constitutional Convention in the democratic and orderly way described in this article? If everyone would focus primarily on just this one issue--having a Constitutional Convention in an agreed-upon, carefully prescribed manner--we could start the process of creating an ideal society.
So many of our best political writers and political organizations do an excellent job describing various problems, but they seldom try to get masses of protesters to unite together around commonly agreed-upon demands. One of the criticisms of the Occupy Wall Street movement was that the movement lacked clearly stated demands.
There are several issues that progressives could rally behind, but if they only represent a fringe element of society, it is unlikely they will get a very large following. But demanding a new constitution could unite masses of citizens from the right and the left once they realize that the process can be done in a very democratic and fair way.
It will take more time for citizens to seriously consider a Constitutional Convention: people have to hear about an idea over and over from many different sources before an idea can gain enough momentum to become a massive movement.
Masses of individuals, writers, activists, and political organizations must start demanding that our federal legislators pass a law that allows the American people to vote on whether they want a Constitutional Convention in a carefully described way every 4 years at each presidential election time. I urge readers to help me find a member of Congress who will introduce such a bill.
My procedural guidelines (in the link above) for letting Americans vote to have a Constitutional Convention, picking the delegates through Proportional Representation, having a 3-month convention, finally having the American voters approve of the new document in a referendum, and electing a new President, Federal Legislators, and Supreme Court Justices--all of the above steps takes about 12 months. So it is a very thought-out, orderly process. The 12-month process has citizens voting twice in one year for a political party which determines what percentage of delegates from each party will be represented at the Convention. It is important that voters have a sufficient amount of time to pick political parties that express their worldviews and values.
We need a new national constitution as soon as possible because with a better government we can start solving the ever increasing political, environmental, social, and economic problems in our society. As mentioned above, to create a new constitution in a systematic and orderly way takes a lot of time. What happens when there are massive demonstrations in every city? I believe at that point martial law under a police state will go into effect, and that will be the end of what little freedom of assembly and freedom of speech we now have.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
