The underlying philosophy of the American Revolution was that of freedom from the dictatorial rule of England. The break from England was a final response to years of effort to reach a compromise with Royalty of the Mother Land. At the basis of the complaint was the desire to reach a level of freedom especially as it related to a voice in government and fair participation in the economy. The monopolistic participation by an elite few pushed out most from participation in governing and financial success from creativity and hard work. At that time wealth was owned by aristocracy and not available to the ordinary worker. Free enterprise was at the foundation of the American movement. Wealth and privilege were mostly owned by virtue of birth rather than productive efforts. Free enterprise requires the free and easy ingress and egress into the economy and that was squelched by royalty.
Benjamin Franklin spent many years of his life trying to persuade England to bequeath the colonies the freedom they needed to realize their dreams and potentials. Once it was obvious that royalty just didn’t get it, Franklin spent time in France to develop an ally. With this move the colonies eventually obtained their freedoms. The natural interaction of business owners and workers in the American economy contrasted with the lack of incentive of royalty and the suppressed workers in England. (Of course, slavery existed in the colonies which was not remedied for decades and the lingering effects of this wrong still exists in many forms today.) In addition to loss of a natural way to grow as a worker, people of the Americas had no voice in governmental decisions necessary to advocate individual rights.
The question now is whether this escape from suppression to individual freedoms and free enterprise are being lost. The following are some examples of the magic that once empowered the social and economic is being destroyed.
Super PACs and hybrid PACs exist in an invisible cloud. Unlimited amounts of money can be set aside; in secret accounts; by the rich; to finance elections and thus undermining the power of the common man. The only agency that could possibly regulate these PACs doesn’t even meet.
Monopolies take away the ability of individuals to form competitive companies and compete in our free enterprise system. In the past 20 years the 10 largest merger deals ever recorded in US history accounted for $1.14 trillion. Less than 5% of merger requests over the past 10 years were blocked or modified by US antitrust authorities over concerns regarding anticompetitive monopolistic effects on our free enterprise system. This destroys the requirement of free enterprise for free and easy ingress and egress into the marketplace. Once again, the common people now are suppressed to a subservient relationship to the elite.
The monopolistic power of these corporations and the ultrarich have invaded the politics of this nation. The Supreme Court addressed secrete unlimited political contributions in Citizens United v FEC and found this invasion into America’s politics to be compatible with the constitution. In a dissent Stevens ably wrote: “…the Court’s opinion is thus a rejection of the common sense of the American people, who have recognized a need to prevent corporations from undermining self-government since the founding, and who have fought against the distinctive corrupting potential of corporate electioneering since the days of Theodore Roosevelt. It is a strange time to repudiate that common sense. While American democracy is imperfect, few outside the majority of this Court would have thought its flaws included a dearth of corporate money in politics.
This opinion reinstitutes an avenue of de facto unchecked control by the powers over the citizens.
The top 1% of the usual income distribution holds over $25 trillion in wealth which exceeds the wealth of the bottom 80%. This 1% has become our de facto version of European Aristocracy.
The major share of the media is held by six companies. Thirty years earlier, 50 companies-controlled 90 percent.
It appears to me that free enterprise and right to select leaders birthed by the emergence of the Americas has now slipped into a controlled society as existed under the royalty of European privileged.
These freedoms are held in high esteem by both political parties and yet I see little coalition to rescue these individual powers.
The article “The Evolution Since Revolution” discusses the American Revolution and its underlying philosophy of freedom from dictatorial rule, which led to a break from England. The article notes that the desire for freedom was based on the need for a voice in government and fair participation in the economy, as the monopolistic participation by an elite few pushed out most from participation in governing and financial success from creativity and hard work.
The article then argues that the freedoms won during the American Revolution are being lost today. The article gives several examples of this loss, including the existence of Super PACs and hybrid PACs, which allow the rich to finance elections and undermine the power of the common man. Additionally, monopolies take away the ability of individuals to form competitive companies and compete in the free enterprise system, and the monopolistic power of corporations and the ultrarich have invaded the politics of the nation. The article notes that the top 1% of the income distribution holds over $25 trillion in wealth, which exceeds the wealth of the bottom 80%, and the major share of the media is held by six companies.
The article concludes that the freedoms birthed by the emergence of the Americas have now slipped into a controlled society as existed under the royalty of European privileged. The article notes that these freedoms are held in high esteem by both political parties, but there is little coalition to rescue these individual powers.
Overall, the article presents a clear argument and provides relevant examples to support its claims. The writing is concise and easy to follow, and the article effectively communicates the author’s views on the topic. However, there are a few grammatical errors that could be corrected to improve the readability of the article.
Thanks
Always like and need grammatical errors…thanks for your thoughts