You highlighted important points: "In 2026, both Oklahoma and Massachusetts — red and blue — will have ballot initiatives to replace party primaries with all-party primaries. Those are our tipping points. Reform in those states can ripple across the country and change the dynamics of American politics itself."
Massachusetts (and John Adams) proved that point extremely powerfully by leading the way in writing the first state constitution that established the sovereignty of the people by having the people, themselves, serve as the supreme legislature and ratify their own constitution (instead of having a legislature do so, as had been the practice among states). See https://web.archive.org/web/20131019192023/http://www.mass.gov/courts/sjc/john-adams-b.html
"During the fall of 1775, Adams had recommended that the people must 'erect the whole Building with their own hands upon the broadest foundation. That this could be done only by conventions of representatives chosen by the People. . . . ' "
"In drafting the Massachusetts Constitution, Adams drew upon his vast knowledge of history and political philosophy, the colonies' experiences under British colonial rule, and his own ideas as articulated in Thoughts on Government. Adams completed his draft by October 30, 1779. He left Massachusetts in November 1779 to return to Europe as minister plenipotentiary.
Following approval by town meetings, the Constitution was ratified on June 15, 1780, and became effective on October 25, 1780."
"we must realize the theories of the wisest writers, and invite the people to erect the whole building with their own hands, upon the broadest foundation" and "this could be done only by conventions of representatives chosen by the people in the several colonies, in the most exact proportions." "Congress ought now to recommend to the people of every Colony to call such conventions immediately, and set up governments of their own, under their own authority; for the people were the source of all authority and original of all power."
Massachusetts became the model for the whole nation. As in Massachusetts, ratification of the original U.S. Constitution by conventions of the people established the sovereignty of the people as the supreme legislature.
SCOTUS Justice James Wilson later explained the related significance of the text and placement of the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution (text and structure of our Constitution). In 1793 in Chisholm v. Georgia, Justice Wilson explained that although “the term SOVEREIGN” is not used in our “Constitution,” the Preamble is the “one place where it could have been used with propriety.” Only those “who ordained and established” our “Constitution” could “have announced themselves ‘SOVEREIGN’ people of the United States.” As the Preamble emphasizes, "We the People" did "ordain and establish" our "Constitution" to "establish Justice" and "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves."
Justice Wilson also highlighted how the first and foremost separation of powers in our Constitution is between the sovereign people and all public servants: “The PEOPLE of the United States” are “the first personages introduced.”
After introducing the sovereign (the people), the text and structure of Articles I, II and III further emphasized the people’s sovereignty. They introduced our directly-elected representatives (Congress), then, our indirectly-elected representative (the president), and, last, our unelected representatives (judges). The people “vested” only limited powers in public servants in and under “Congress” (U.S. Const. Art. I, §1), the “President” (Art. II, §1) and the “supreme Court” and “inferior Courts” that “Congress” was delegated the power to “ordain and establish” (Art. III, §1).
Thank you very much for all you're doing to try to help revive and reinvigorate the sovereignty of the people in multiple states and in the U.S.
Well said! I think you nailed the premise: "Democracy is not a spectator sport" and "citizenship" means "work."
In "Common Sense" Thomas Paine emphasized similar common sense. Paine reminded Americans that if they failed to fight at home for their own liberty, then as British subjects they could be sent “to support the British arms” far from home in “Asia, Africa, or Europe.” That principle still applies. If Americans fail to fight on our home turf for our own rights (our own sovereignty over our public servants), then our public servants will make us serve them (as they are now with the practices you described manipulating elections). That is human nature and the way of the word.
In "The Rights of Man" Paine extolled the virtues of "revolution" in America, but he was clear that he (like many of his generation) spoke not of violence but of practices and power turning or revolving:
"The independence of America, considered merely as a separation from England, would have been a matter but of little importance, had it not been accompanied by a revolution in the principles and practice of governments. She made a stand, not for herself only, but for the world, and looked beyond the advantages herself could receive."
"The revolution of America presented in politics what was only theory in mechanics. So deeply rooted were all the governments of the old world, and so effectually had the tyranny and the antiquity of habit established itself over the mind, that no beginning could be made in Asia, Africa, or Europe, to reform the political condition of man. Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think."
But "no sooner did the American governments display themselves to the world, than despotism felt a shock and man began to contemplate redress."
You highlighted important points: "In 2026, both Oklahoma and Massachusetts — red and blue — will have ballot initiatives to replace party primaries with all-party primaries. Those are our tipping points. Reform in those states can ripple across the country and change the dynamics of American politics itself."
Massachusetts (and John Adams) proved that point extremely powerfully by leading the way in writing the first state constitution that established the sovereignty of the people by having the people, themselves, serve as the supreme legislature and ratify their own constitution (instead of having a legislature do so, as had been the practice among states). See https://web.archive.org/web/20131019192023/http://www.mass.gov/courts/sjc/john-adams-b.html
"During the fall of 1775, Adams had recommended that the people must 'erect the whole Building with their own hands upon the broadest foundation. That this could be done only by conventions of representatives chosen by the People. . . . ' "
"In drafting the Massachusetts Constitution, Adams drew upon his vast knowledge of history and political philosophy, the colonies' experiences under British colonial rule, and his own ideas as articulated in Thoughts on Government. Adams completed his draft by October 30, 1779. He left Massachusetts in November 1779 to return to Europe as minister plenipotentiary.
Following approval by town meetings, the Constitution was ratified on June 15, 1780, and became effective on October 25, 1780."
It seems Adams said the following in June (not in the fall) of 1775 (http://files.libertyfund.org/files/2101/Adams_1431-03_EBk_v6.0.pdf):
"we must realize the theories of the wisest writers, and invite the people to erect the whole building with their own hands, upon the broadest foundation" and "this could be done only by conventions of representatives chosen by the people in the several colonies, in the most exact proportions." "Congress ought now to recommend to the people of every Colony to call such conventions immediately, and set up governments of their own, under their own authority; for the people were the source of all authority and original of all power."
Massachusetts became the model for the whole nation. As in Massachusetts, ratification of the original U.S. Constitution by conventions of the people established the sovereignty of the people as the supreme legislature.
SCOTUS Justice James Wilson later explained the related significance of the text and placement of the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution (text and structure of our Constitution). In 1793 in Chisholm v. Georgia, Justice Wilson explained that although “the term SOVEREIGN” is not used in our “Constitution,” the Preamble is the “one place where it could have been used with propriety.” Only those “who ordained and established” our “Constitution” could “have announced themselves ‘SOVEREIGN’ people of the United States.” As the Preamble emphasizes, "We the People" did "ordain and establish" our "Constitution" to "establish Justice" and "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves."
Justice Wilson also highlighted how the first and foremost separation of powers in our Constitution is between the sovereign people and all public servants: “The PEOPLE of the United States” are “the first personages introduced.”
After introducing the sovereign (the people), the text and structure of Articles I, II and III further emphasized the people’s sovereignty. They introduced our directly-elected representatives (Congress), then, our indirectly-elected representative (the president), and, last, our unelected representatives (judges). The people “vested” only limited powers in public servants in and under “Congress” (U.S. Const. Art. I, §1), the “President” (Art. II, §1) and the “supreme Court” and “inferior Courts” that “Congress” was delegated the power to “ordain and establish” (Art. III, §1).
Thank you very much for all you're doing to try to help revive and reinvigorate the sovereignty of the people in multiple states and in the U.S.
Well said! I think you nailed the premise: "Democracy is not a spectator sport" and "citizenship" means "work."
In "Common Sense" Thomas Paine emphasized similar common sense. Paine reminded Americans that if they failed to fight at home for their own liberty, then as British subjects they could be sent “to support the British arms” far from home in “Asia, Africa, or Europe.” That principle still applies. If Americans fail to fight on our home turf for our own rights (our own sovereignty over our public servants), then our public servants will make us serve them (as they are now with the practices you described manipulating elections). That is human nature and the way of the word.
In "The Rights of Man" Paine extolled the virtues of "revolution" in America, but he was clear that he (like many of his generation) spoke not of violence but of practices and power turning or revolving:
"The independence of America, considered merely as a separation from England, would have been a matter but of little importance, had it not been accompanied by a revolution in the principles and practice of governments. She made a stand, not for herself only, but for the world, and looked beyond the advantages herself could receive."
"The revolution of America presented in politics what was only theory in mechanics. So deeply rooted were all the governments of the old world, and so effectually had the tyranny and the antiquity of habit established itself over the mind, that no beginning could be made in Asia, Africa, or Europe, to reform the political condition of man. Freedom had been hunted round the globe; reason was considered as rebellion; and the slavery of fear had made men afraid to think."
But "no sooner did the American governments display themselves to the world, than despotism felt a shock and man began to contemplate redress."
For opposing kings, few can best the pen of Paine. So you might like to consider "Common Sense: Ridicule Fake Kings and Keep the Constitution King" https://open.substack.com/pub/blackcollarcrime/p/common-sense-ridicule-would-be-kings?r=30ufvh&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
Can "the people" sue T-rump for destroying public property? And can we add signs that read "no felons" or "no dictators" or . . .