Our obligations to the government?
 

There is a speech tournament coming up in December, and in this tournament we are to write a speech that focuses on an aspect of the constitution that emphasizes citizens' responsibilities and obligations to the government.

I've come up with a lot of ideas initially, but not much else, and I'm afraid I may not be seeing other angles, and other sides that I should be seeing.

So far I'm leaning towards writing about how our guaranteed rights from the Bill of Rights, make us have a responsibility to protect ourselves and our government from corruption by exercising our rights. It is our responsibility to "establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity" as it says in the Preamble. Wakka Wakka Wakka. (on a side note, the whole thing is sort of funny because we all expect our rights to a speedy trial by jury but everyone tries to get out of jury duty).

I don't want anyone doing my work for me, but I do want to sort of open the discussion so I can see things from other angles, and maybe use that to strengthen my own points, etc, whatever.

So...what obligations do we, as citizens, have to our government?

Voting is the primary obligations Americans should do.

you want a philosophical or a practical approach?

what i mean is, when you say to "establish justice", you want to talk about the meaning of justice as established by the citizens (as opposed to, say, the king), or do you wanna talk about the importance of jury duty?

I haven't quite got that far. I've only brainstormed on some lined paper. Other people seem to be taking more of the voting and jury duty route, so I think (in terms of the competition) it'd be smarter to separate myself from them by taking the more philosophical approach.

Edit: Though I think in the long run, I shouldn't get too philosophical. I'd like to be able to apply the philosophical aspect of it, and make it relevant for today. I think that, overall, makes for a strong speech. A balance of philosophy, and real life applications/examples.

Edit edit: I have, out of necessity, become addicted to sleeping. I've been going to sleep at 9 recently, so I'm an hour past my preferred "bed time". Good night.

i see...

well if you want to go against the grain, you might want to tackle

secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity

and discuss the bush record.

so, it falls on the citizens to secure the blessings of liberty. they are not handed to you. so who's more patriotic-- the rah rah blind supporter of the government, or the protester who fights to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity? ehhhh???

if you want to get even more philosophical you could discuss liberty as a value, and how it is the quintessential american value which distinguishes this country from others where citizens are by definition subjects of the state.

how unamerican is the attack on civil liberties?

how american is it to protest the government?

can you destroy america by claiming to protect it?

this & more down the road less taken travelled...

in other words:

most people are going to say: we have a duty to the government so we must obey (typical highschool kissass mentality)

but you could argue: we have a duty to the government so we must disobey

tie that up nicely w/ thoreau's civil disobedience FTW

the duty of "Americans" is to pay attention. this is their participation. to be conscious of how their decisions affect other people, particularly their patterns of consumption. if Americans do not pay attention, then the America of today, is the America that you will get. moral of the story, perhaps people should start paying attention.

Yes that is why they should vote.

I thought that the government had obligation towards the citizens ! ( well , a long time ago )

You might get some ideas by watching "Mr Smith goes to Washington" or "Mr Lisa goes to Washington" ( Simpsons , season 3 )

I think everyone has a duty to their government to point out where they have catastrophically and monumentally fucked up and can't see it

Which is invariably the case

not quite strong enough. you are thinking of beer, and I am thinking of moonshine.


see, he gets it.

I don't like the phrasing "duty (or obligations) to government." Our duty isn't to the government, but rather our fellow citizens. Government is the machine by which we can facilitate our duties.

On the other hand, the government does have duties to its citizens. Namely, protecting our legal, property, and human rights -- our liberty. The government, and those citizens who comprise its agencies, also has a duty to remain just and uncorrupted. Since the government has generally failed in this regard, the citizenry has the responsibility of keeping the government accountable for its actions; but again, this is an obligation to ourselves and our fellow citizens, not the government itself.

^^ very well put

i was rereading the preamble and it says that the constitution is written for that purpose, but the preamble doesnt outline any "obligations"

Yes, that is why we should cast informed votes and also be aware of the the military and economic ramifications of our collective* political actions.
* yeah, that's right, we are all still responsible; this is a representative democracy still...moreso on paper than in actuality, yeah, but whose fault is that? The blame lies clearly with the electorate who have allowed themselves to become sheep. Corruption is our fault, Americans. It's our onus for being so naive as to not know human nature and that power corrupts...duh...which is why the checks and balances and Bill of Rights are in the U.S. Constitution in the first place. Those checks and balances were written over two centuries ago, so get hip: it is up to us to exercise our rights and right this ship.

We must reform campaign financing. Kudos to Sen. John Edwards and Sen. Barack Obama who have refused to take PAC money for their campaigns.
Barack Obama joined John Edwards in attacking Hillary Clinton for ... - Nov 1, 2007
Barring any miraculous changes that remian to be seen, we must collectively demand an end to career politicians, by any consititutional means necessary.


Ask not...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE0iPY7XGBo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3s6U8GActdQ
a tad cliche, a tad hot air, but

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it. - Abraham Lincoln

Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Abraham Lincoln

Nice quotations Atari, thanks. I might use one of them, depending on how the writing process goes (and if I get chosen to go to this competition, as only 3 people per school are allowed).

It's interesting your question brought to mind for me the famous JFK line, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." Which is not a statement I have ever found myself whole-heartedly agreeing with, yet which does have some merit when we accept the purpose of government to protect the weak and provide for the common good.

I've always been a pretty strong individualist, which is something I always admired about Sonic Youth. I heard Thurston say in an interview on Canadian radio in the '80s that Sonic Youth believed in the "politics of the individual, because group politics in America is largely a joke". Certainly something I identified with, and yet there are actually some moral reasons for a system of government, even if such systems seem to fail so often.

In Oregon where I live there is a huge debate over land use and property owner rights versus the common good. After untold decades of pretty strict land use regulations, an initiative passed last year that turned all of that upside down by allowing property owners to sue the state if such zoning could cause them demonstable financial suffering. Almost immediately tons of people in farming zones who want to sell to huge developers launched suits, and now there is a new initiative currently being voted on to repeal the last one and once again give the government more ability to tell land owners what they can do with their property.

Certainly it's easy to say that people ought to be able to do whatever they want with their own property, but the thing is, it does affect their neighbors. It's impossible to keep your farm if you've got massive housing developments on every border of your property, and our local sustainable food economy is severely damaged without some sort of restriction to what people can do.

So arguably, citizens have a responsibility to participate in a government that provides for a greater good beyond themselves and their immediate next of kin. I have very mixed feelings about this, but I do see some truth to it as well.

The other answers people have given here are all really good ones too. It's a complicated issue, which is part of why things become so messy (along with the corruptable nature of far too much of humanity.)

I just got back from the competition, and I got 3rd place, and a check for $200. I thought it was going to be scholarship money but I can go cash it in. NICE.

That's nice Alex.