Democracy IS the Tool to Deal With The Citizens' Anger

  Something I heard someone else say in recent weeks.

The word “anger” does not equate to “hatred”. However any person who pushes down the emotion of anger and does not deal with the realities of anger is irresponsible. How? Dealing with the reasons for the anger, through open and honest communication, is the only thing that really allows credible resolution to the reasons for the anger.

Think about that in your own life's lessons. Think about that human emotion, that is often justified in our human beings.

Then think carefully about what the primary LEGAL promise is to any and all citizens in the rules of democracy. When it comes to our human nature and "anger".

Our vote is said to be our voice. That is only part of it. OUR VOICE, our daily voice, our daily communications are the most critical part of this legal promise.

The LAWS of democracy promise us daily equivalency and consideration. NOT just on the day of OUR VOTE, but in every day of our living. INDEED, our courts were intended to be the LEGAL INSTRUMENT to protect this principle.

Why?

Think about how that came to be. Monarchs and dictators treated the people with contempt until the citizens came to realize that their anger was justifiable. Violence and revolution and war became inhumane reactions. Eventually, the citizens were promised that elected officials would be their daily voice to deal with their anger over any issue, before it got to the point of hatred.
So, think about that as you read the following.
OUR CORRUPTED ELECTORAL PROCESSES have led to nations in North America where 60% of the citizens push down their anger and stay away from the polls. Our politicians, because they are in positions of power, VIA OUR VOTE, use this as an excuse to do to us as they will. They shut out our daily voice with the excuse that our vote gives them the right to do what they want. And, they protect themselves through courts where their partisan friends are already entrenched OR by creating new “courts” even in our Parliaments. Read what I write about Bev Oda, below, to understand why I dare to say the latter.

STOP THE ILLEGALITIES is our angry message that many of us are not saying. So, where does the irresponsibility lay? With those who dare to say there is justifiable reason to be angry? Or those who say that the only way to resolve the reasons is through "patient diplomacy", that ignores the anger.
The lessons from our history are that the latter position IS irresponsible. "Optimism" does not a problem solve. AND it is unforgivable when the angry voice, the warning voice, is simply pushed aside because it makes the irresponsible too uncomfortable.
Yes, it is time to challenge the politician and their bureaucrats.
Yes, it is time for the rest of us to ask why we tolerate the illegal. This is especially true given what we expect of others in other nations (like Tunisia, Egypt and Libya as recent examples) or what we expected, because of the history of this planet to 1945. And since.
But, private citizens must demonstrate that they know what “responsible behaviour” is.
Many do not like that I write angrily. Those who think this may want to visit the second letter below, especially.
It is time to start answering these questions.
When do we start to stand outside those institutions of “democracy” which the arrogant partisans have taken away from us?
When do we stand up against the potential farce of another “election” when our vote is already made meaningless and inconsequential by all of this corruption?
By partisans and their elitist friends in our societies.
And so, yes, while history will make record of the justifiable anger we should express against the citizens who stay irresponsibly silent, IF we are credible in our self promotions that we want credible democracies, then we will start to ask why any among us shut down words, or simply hope that they will go away.
When we claim to be ethical people wanting credible democracy.
But, I will not allow those who take one dime of our taxes and then stay silent to what has illegally happened in our democratic institutions, to NOT be made legally accountable in the future. And that is the reason for the letters of stern warnings posted below, which went to the likes of more "high and mighty" organizations. These people take millions of our tax dollars with grand, and illegal, hypocrisy. They are legally obliged to read a book which irresponsible citizens may merely dismiss, irresponsibly, because they do not want to investigate why there are angry words in the author's writings.
That makes the citizen irresponsible, especially given our world history.
BUT it does not diminish the illegal hypocrisy of those, especially of the likes of organizations led by Stein and Murray, whose "leaders" should know better than to promote the silence, through the illegal realignment of one cent of our taxes. This, "Let the citizens eat cake!" attitude must end for once and for all times, if our humanity ever hopes to move ahead. Responsibly. For the generations yet to come.