Go To SPOXTalk.comHome

     Total Page Views
We received
page views since Nov 2004



Security Code: Security Code
Type Security Code

     Shop Amazon

     Stories By Topic
Vermont News

A Judge Lynching
All My Aliens
Art News
Health News
Paranormal News
Political News
Sci-fi News
Science News
Spiritual News
The News
Travel News
Unusual News
Vermont News

· Home
· 007
· Ask_Shabby
· Content
· Dates
· Downloads
· Feedback
· Fine_Print
· Forums
· Fun_Stuff
· Game_World
· Home_Grown
· Journal
· Link_To
· Private Messages
· Recommend Us
· Reviews
· Search
· Site_Credits
· SPOX_Talk
· Stone_Tarot
· Stores_Shop
· Stories Archive
· Submit News
· Surveys
· Tell_Us
· Top 10
· Top Stories
· Topics
· Weather_Station
· Web Links
· Your Account

     Who's Online
There are currently, 92 guest(s) and 0 member(s) that are online.

     Monthly Quote
“If a man has an apartment stacked to the ceiling with newspapers we call him crazy. If a woman has a trailer house full of cats we call her nuts. But when people pathologically hoard so much cash that they impoverish the entire nation, we put them on the cover of Fortune magazine and pretend that they are role models.”
-– B. Lester

     Link to us!
AlienLove Logos

Add Your Link To Us!

     Anti-War Webs
Anti-War Web Ring
[<<<] [ list ] [???] [ join ] [>>>]

 Vermont News: We Need Democracy, Not Moneyocracy

By Peter Moss

Most Vermonters sincerely believe they live in a democracy. Asked to define democracy, few can respond meaningfully. Wilkipedia, the Internet encyclopedia, says it is "rule by the people," from the Greek demos, people, and kratos, rule, and is a form of government for a nation state, or for an organization in which all the citizens have an equal vote or voice in shaping policy. According to Webster's Collegiate dictionary, the word entered the English language in 1576. Webster's offers these definitions: 1a. Government by the people, especially rule of the majority, 1b. A government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.

President George W. Pinocchio believes democracy means "regime change" which is the violent removal of an uncooperative head of state, and his replacement by a pro-U.S. expatriate to represent U.S. Big Business interests. After invasion and occupation, "free" elections are held and the new U.S. puppet always wins. Dissent is violently suppressed and kangaroo "courts" try and do away with the uncooperative head of state usually denigrated as dictator, war lord, or thug. To me, that's bushmocracy, pronounced boo-schmuck-racee, not democracy. ("schmuck" is in Webster's)...

Shop Amazon with AlienLove
Help Support AlienLove - Shop Amazon

Neither the Wilkipedia, nor Webster's define moneyocracy. The Oxford Dictionary of the English Language defines it as "The moneyed class as a ruling power." The word first appeared in print in 1834 in Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine. One of my plans is to popularize the word moneyocracy because as long as so many people believe we live in a democracy, we will continue to bleed and die and suffer from the moneyocrats: a few thousand self-interested power mongers in Big Business, in the regime, and in the law business including the courts. Not to blame the Founding Fathers, but as a historical note, they brought upon us moneyocracy to fill the vacuum left by abolishing the aristocracy (Constitution, Article I, Sec. 9 sub.8). Other developed countries are suffering from moneyocracy, but to a lesser extent.

In 1926, then-Senator William E. Borah of Idaho said: "Money has come to be the moving power in American politics ... Some years ago, politicians got into the habit of seeking contributions from men of great wealth ... it was inevitable, if large sums were to be given, that large sums would have to be returned in some way. Hence, money and politicians joined forces, and money has its say in shaping legislation and in administering the laws of the country ... It is a fearful national evil and will in the end, if not controlled, destroy the government of the people and substitute therefor, a government of the few -- the few who have sufficient money to buy the government." [p.71 in "If the Gods Had Meant Us to Vote They Would Have Given Us Candidates" by Jim Hightower, © 2000]. Now, 80 years later, we know that "the fearful national evil" has not been controlled.

In the U.S. as in Vermont, the moneyocrats continue to exercise power by deceit, carefully protected by the Big Media. Our moneyocratic rulers control U.S. politics by calling the Republicans and Democrats "the major parties" and financing only major party candidates who then become "frontrunners." In turn, the Big Media give free publicity only to "frontrunners" as if there were no other, worthier candidates. In turn, "neutral" sponsors (e.g.goodie-two-shoes AARP, WCAX, The Vermont Times, etc.) don't invite third-party and independent candidates "since they have no chance anyway" and thereby create a self-fulfilling prophecy. Frontrunners are obedient and docile because any indiscretion giving away the game would result in loss of moneyocratic funding for their name recognition re-election campaign. Since the moneyocrats alone have the money to finance name recognition politics (as opposed to issue politics), they alone control what the issues are and what solutions may be considered.

Comes now South Burlington Senator Jim Condos and promotes four year terms for Constitutional officers, very likely to be followed by four year terms for all 180 representatives and senators. This is a significant self-revelation by the self-interested, moneyocratic, unrepresentative Vermont regime that has been re-electing itself every two years, with name recognition financed by special interest lobbies fronting for the moneyocrats, and now wants four years of job security where the majority don't even deserve two years. I plan to organize sufficient resistance and will promote single two year terms. The four year term for an unlimited number of temrs, is another step away from a citizen legislature which Vermonters like to believe we have. It converts Vermont's governor into a unitary executive, just when Vermonters really need a solitary executive whose veto can be overriden and who can be recalled by a majority of voters, without any stated reason or need to prove a reason.

If you are opposed to a unitary executive and unlimited 4-year terms, please e-mail me at [email protected]
or write to me: P.O.Box 413,
Fairfax, VT 05454

Thank you,

Peter Moss

To learn more about Peter Moss visit his website at http://www.petermoss.org

To Order Peter's Book "The Conscience Of A PROSERVATIVE"
Click Here

Discuss this article in our forums.

Listen To SPOXTalk.

     Related Links
· More about Politics
· News by FrogDaddy

Most read story about Politics:
Vermont Side Judge Roles

     Article Rating
Average Score: 5
Votes: 2

Please take a second and vote for this article:

Very Good


 Printer Friendly Printer Friendly

"We Need Democracy, Not Moneyocracy" | Login/Create an Account | 2 comments | Search Discussion
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.

No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register

Re: We Need Democracy, Not Moneyocracy (Score: 1)
by Toeg on Tuesday, November 21 @ 22:45:25 EST
(User Info | Send a Message)
Very well stated. I have these comments: You write eloquently and knowledgeably, but I think the first moneyocracy was developed by Rothschild and the Knights Templar before him. The Knights Templar showed how to create a bank for the wealthy, and Rothschild showed how to connect them. The Federal Reserve Act was passed in 1913 to give control of our economy over to the private, rich citizens. Until we repeal this Act, and return the handling of all monetary and fiscal responsibilities back to our government and elected officials, we will be run by big business. However, your overall message is admirable and I commend you for it. To show how Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin, one only need to look at Lieberman in Connecticut. He lost as a Democrat in the primaries. Ran as an Independent. And finally received 75% of the Republican votes in the state to win reelection. Where's the second party, let alone the third??

Re: We Need Democracy, Not Moneyocracy (Score: 1)
by Blue1moon on Sunday, November 26 @ 12:34:27 EST
(User Info | Send a Message)
Great article, Peter!
I saw you on Super Sunday - the Vermont Debates and was quite impressed!
But once again the very unimpressive dems and repubs won - exactly because of the self-fullfilling prophecy that says a vote for anyone not bought is a wasted vote. How can it be more wasted than what we end up with as "representation" year after year, decade after decade?

Site Copyright AlienLove 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
AlienLove is part of Scifillian Inc.
and SpoxTalk.com

PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
Page Generation: 0.11 Seconds