"Bernie Palicki is one of our favorite Independent presidential candidates. He's one of a rare species: a Conservative with a Sense of Humor

His thought provoking proposals for fiscal policy and economic reform are well gounded and worth exploring.

Bernie takes a strong position on the basic nature of our political system, supporting the view that it is a republic, rather than a democracy. Recently, another Independent Candidate asked him an interesting question:

Mr. Palicki:

If America was not founded as a Democracy, why did Thomas Jefferson name his party, the Democratic Republican Party?

A.J. Albritton

Palicki responded with the following letter:

Dear Mr. Albritton,

I am almost ecstatic that someone would finally ask the question you are asking. Below is my answer. Sorry I can't be more brief.

The U.S. Constitution of government provides only for establishment of a 'Republic', and all separate and sovereign states of the U.S. are guaranteed a 'republic' form of government.

The term 'democracy' does not appear anywhere in that document called the U.S. Constitution.

Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, reads, "The United States shall guarantee to every State in the Union a Republican Form of government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature, cannot be convened) against domestic Violence."

Some 300 hundred years before the birth of Christ, Aristotle, a dissident pupil of Plato, defined 'democracy' as a perversion of 'constitutional' government.

I have read the dialogues of Plato. I have also read Aristotle's dissident opinion and conclusions. Aristotle was a student of Plato. Plato was previously a student of Socrates. It was Plato who documented the teachings and preachings of Socrates. Alexander the Great was personally tutored by Aristotle.

Socrates was the first 'socialist'. Socrates expounded on and drew the blueprint for 'socialism', where, in any final analysis, 'democracy' is just another name for 'socialism'. Christ, some 300 years later, countering the teachings of Socrates, was the first 'capitalist', as expressed in His 'parable of the talents'.

The founding fathers were not stupid men. The founding fathers were learned men. The founding fathers read Plato, who provided nothing more than the 'socialist' teachings of Socrates. The founding fathers read Aristotle, who did not agree with Plato in Socrates' description of the 'perfect state'. The founding fathers read Gibbon's account of causes of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire (published, ironically, on July 4, 1776).

You will be hard pressed to find any difference between characteristics of the 'socialist state' described by Socrates, and his prescription for establishment of the 'socialist state', and the 'socialist state' the United states has become.

Socrates' prescription has been written into all the current laws of the United States - laws that are prevelant and control all human behavior in the United States today. I call behavior of all U.S. citizens, in response to our 'socialist state laws', the 'socialist-welfare-state' mentality.

[NOTE: "All of our astronomer scientists are looking for intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, because they can't find any on this electron-like planet called Earth." - B. Palicki original.]

A 'republican form' of government originally made the Roman Empire a great civilization. Rome's 'republican form' of government initially provided for all of its citizens a better way of life. Julius Caesar screwed it up by his usurpation of Executive Power and Privelege - a usurpation of power got him assassinated. (Julius Ceasar's adopted nephew was Ceasar Augustus, who, after Julius' assassination, became and was ruler of the Roman Empire when Christ was born in Judea. Previously, the Romans had conquered and occupied all of Judea - the promised land.)

The founding fathers of the U.S. also read 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire', by Gibbon. Gibbon marked beginning of that decline with the birth of Christ in Judea, under Roman rule.

Gibbon reported specific events, in a chronological order of occurrance. Specific events documented by Gibbon were specific events that contributed to destruction of the 'republican form of government' of the Roman Empire.

Weaknesses and corruption of government in Rome were dutifully pointed out and described by Gibbon. The founding fathers capitalized on recognition of those weaknesses, and the corruption from those weaknesses that was allowed to creep into 'republican' government of the Roman empire.

During the Constitutional Convention of 1787, B. Franklin noted, that they had searched forms of government, both ancient and modern, but found none of them suitable to the circumstances of the new colonies (original 13 States).

Taking lesson from experience with government by the Caesars of Rome, the founding fathers formed a 're-public form' of government, dividing and distributing the total powers of government - making the law, enforcing the law and punishing for violation or infraction of the law.

Theoretically, through such distribution or separation of those powers of government, government could not become despotic or tyrannical. Now, providing that the people elect the makers and administrators of the law, theoretically, the will of the people is then exercised by the elected. In other words, the will of the public is returned to the public in the form of law. Re-public - re, as in re-turn, and public, as in people.

Thomas Jefferson wrote the 'Declaration Of Independence' on July 4, 1776. B. Franklin was offered the task, but refused. Speaking for all the founding fathers, Jefferson provided in writing, expressing the common mind of the founding Fathers, the underlying justification for a militant rebellion against the ruling establishment of that time and place.

It was weakness of power of central government, under the Articles of Confederation, that drove requirement for the Constitutional Convention of 1787 - a convention that resulted in our current written U.S. Constitution of and for government.

Writing, to garner support for ratification of the Constitution being written at the time, Madison, Hamilton and Jay, denounced the concept of 'democracy' in the Federalist Papers. Upon leaving the Convention, Benjamin Franklin, was asked, "What kind of government do we have?" He answered, "A republic, Madam, if we can keep it".

Thomas Jefferson was right for his time in the 18th century. Strong powers of central government, he asserted, provided for takeover of the rest of the territory that finally became what you and I know as the United States of America.

Other than writing the Declaration of Independence in 1776, Thomas Jefferson's only other major contribution occurred 27 years later, as President, when he executed the Louisiana Purchase - opening the door for exploration and expansion of the United States to lands west of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Through execution of that purchase, with congressional approval, Jefferson demonstrated supreme power of federal government over all lower levels of government, totally oblivious to and independent of any popular concern or support of his actions.

Later, a great civil war was fought over the rights of states vis a vis the power of a superior federal government (not over 'slavery' that existed globally, wherein 'slavery' was written into law from the time the original Constitution was written, but over the sovereign rights of separate and sovereign states - states rights of self-determination under government in the form of a republic).

Only God and Thomas Jefferson know why he would use the term 'democratic' in the naming of a political party. I would think he would have known better.

In closing:

1. The term 'democracy' suggests that the people (the masses) make the law, enforce the law and mete out the different forms or kinds of punishment for violation or infraction of the law. As a practical matter, 'democracy', by that broad definition, is not true and not workable - and countless thousands of pages of literature have been written and argue whether or not 'democracy' works. In my view, I side with Aristotle - 'democracy' doesn't work, it is a perversion of constitutional government.

2. There is nothing in the Constitution that provides that the United States be ruled by a political party, or rival political party organizations. The Constitution provides only that the total power of government - making the law, enforcing the law, and meting out punishment for violation or infraction of law, be distributed through the architecture of an Executive Branch (administrator of Law), and a Legislative Branch (the maker of law). The Judicial Branch is not, in reality, a separate Branch. Under the U.S. Constitution, except for the Supreme Court, the Judicial Branch belongs to the Executive Branch.

Separation of powers between Executive and Judicial is imaginary. As Gibbon described, the citizens of Rome were deceived by an image of civil liberty, and its military was deceived by an image of civil justice.

In any final analysis, it doesn't matter what terms were used by T. Jefferson to name a political party. Political party organizations have no constitutional foundation or authority to make law, administer law or to punish for infraction or violation of law.

Thanks, sincerely, for your query, and opportunity to express my most sincere and deeply imbedded conclusions and convictions.

God Bless,

________________________________
Bernard Palicki
Presidential Candidate (Ind-AL)
Not soliciting or accepting contributions. Still working for wages after 58 years, and still almost as poor as a church mouse, running for election solely via the Internet, and doing so for less than it costs to run for 'dog-catcher'. Could do the same for the U.S. as a national household, but will never have that opportunity, because of state ballot-access laws that are as un-constitional as gun-control laws.

Return to Election Reform