Isaac Jan Alexander Gogel Quotes

Ironically, many Republican leaders give lip service to decentralized government but they fight hard for centralized national government making. Many want Congress to make laws governing abortion and other family planning techniques. Some want the state to decide, but almost no Republicans want to leave these personal decisions to the local government much less the family and women involved. In business regulation as well, republican fight tooth and nail to have Federal legislation prempt state and local government about tort liability for defective products, and they always prefer that the Federal SEC make all the rules and regulations about selling stocks and bonds and do not want state or local government to “interfere”. Likewise, they have emasculated the state governments when it comes to authority over the state militias where virtually all the controls and promotions are decided by Congress and the Department of Defense and not by Governors or local politicians. Ther are many other examples. In most of the solid Republican Southern States, the local school boards cannot even select the textbooks that schools will use and the Republicans centralize this with the State government and state legislatures which they control. Democrats also are generally opposed to decentralization except for large cities having control along with the Federal government but otherwise they too do not want decentralization. For national political parties, what is the point of winning national elections of the big decisions are made locally?

There was huge pressure on the central government to decentralize as they held all the power in Indonesian society. However, if they devolved power to the Provinces (States), many of them could be large enough and independent enough to secede and become an independent country as East Timor had done. So the Indonesian power structure bypassed the Provincial governments and devolved power directly to the local governments, none of which was independent enough to go it alone. The desired objective was met—no more secessions. However, there was no one to worry about regional and national issues and problems as the politicians who had power were all local. The country was becoming non-functional in many ways.

Lieber is best known because he was assigned by President Lincoln to study the then international laws of war and prepare a manual for the guidance of union troops in the Civil War. Lincoln then issued the document as a general order.

Madison was defending the proposed Constitution against a vocal minority who complained that the Federal government would be dominant over the States and the large cities. Madison pointed out that it was people who fought the Revolution and sacrificed for it, not States or political entities. The Constitution was to be for the people, not the existing governmental entities. It was for Americans and not for local politicians. The “State’s Rights faction lost the debate, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights was adopted. That is why this quotation is so important. The slavery enthusiasts, racists, and others have constantly tried to diminish the Federal supremacy even to this day.

The Grammar Curmudgeon. In most states there is a parallel question of the State government and the local government balance of powers.

He later settled for Home Rule in the Irish Treaty of 1922

Dickinson was one of those who argued for a very weak executive (President)

Mason’s view prevailed. What is interesting is that Mason saw the State as the State Legislature as opposed to the people of the state directly voting for the Senators as we do today.

In a sense, the European Parliament, was what Adler wanted for the democratic nations of the world.

At the time there was no concept of serious separation of powers. For all practical purposes, the King ruled and he shared some of his powers with the Parliament. The next centuries in England would see the great battle for governmental power between the monarch and the Parliament. Today, the British monarch has no power but still retains a great deal of influence in England but largely because Queen Elisabeth is so well loved and respected.

In addition, most state and local corrupt officials are detected, and prosecuted by Federal law enforcement officials as local and sometimes state corruption involves the local and state law enforcement officials as well as others so local authorities often turn a blind eye towards corruption.

Although opposed to monarchy himself, Langdon argued that a people had a right to select monarchical government if they chose. See {634001} for Rev. Dan Foster’s similar argument at in that period.

Not only did the people in Afghanistan have very little experience with central government, but they had little history of government of any sort. There were loose tribes somewhat unified by culture, but there was little or no tribal government. The same with clans. Each Afghanistan male was his own ruler over his wives and children in a family centric society. While virtually all were Muslim, there was no hierarchy or structure of the clergy in that society.

Despite his warning---and that of others—all that they could get agreement upon had each of these three weaknesses. After winning the American Revolution, the new country found the Articles of Confederation and the Continental Congress completely inadequate and finally in 1787 there was a Constitutional Convention held in secret in Philadelphia to overcome the weaknesses of the existing structure of which the warnings of Rush were three of the problems that had to be fixed.