This video gives a pretty good idea of what it's like. (I am in it as a counselor, though it is from last year's BYS. They haven't put up this year's yet on youtube.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EEKqmaN6XU
Sunday, July 28, 2013
BYS
I just finished a week on Boise State campus being a counselor for 36 fantastic youth in the Boise Youth Spectacular. It was one of the most amazing experiences of my life. If you're an LDS youth in the Boise area or even from anywhere, I strongly encourage attending. If you're an LDS young single adult, I strongly encourage being staff or counselor. It will change your life, like it has mine. I won't give specifics because any story I share will include other people, mostly minors and I just don't want to even approach the issue of legalities, but each youth changed my life for better and I now know what changes I need to make in my life to become better and closer to God and what's more, I saw changes in every person that I was in contact with there. I don't know how much of a difference I made, but I do know that I made some amount of difference and for that I am grateful.
This video gives a pretty good idea of what it's like. (I am in it as a counselor, though it is from last year's BYS. They haven't put up this year's yet on youtube.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EEKqmaN6XU
This video gives a pretty good idea of what it's like. (I am in it as a counselor, though it is from last year's BYS. They haven't put up this year's yet on youtube.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EEKqmaN6XU
Saturday, July 13, 2013
Birthdays!
I got on the blog today and realized that I'd never published this! So here it is:
"Nothing of importance happened today." -King George III, July 4th, 1776.
Happy Birthday to my country! 237 years old. And may there be many, many more! And my goodness, how well you've aged! Well, I guess that part's debatable..
And Happy Birthday to my state as well! 43rd sibling in the American Family of States. Now if only we'd get rid of some sibling rivalry...
Heureux Jour de Bastille!
Actually, I don't speak French. I just got that from GoogleTranslate.
But Happy Bastille Day nonetheless!
It may not have been the most successful revolution nor the most humane, but it was important to our history as a world. I'm not entirely sure why, but it sure sounds good to say it.
This is going to be my last post for at least two weeks. I'm going to go to BYS (Boise Youth Spectacular) and be a counselor for 30 or so wonderful youth! So I will post about that when I get back.
But Happy Bastille Day nonetheless!
It may not have been the most successful revolution nor the most humane, but it was important to our history as a world. I'm not entirely sure why, but it sure sounds good to say it.
This is going to be my last post for at least two weeks. I'm going to go to BYS (Boise Youth Spectacular) and be a counselor for 30 or so wonderful youth! So I will post about that when I get back.
Tuesday, July 2, 2013
POTUS Smith: What Could Have Been
Keep in mind that any statement here containing "did" is historical fact and anything "would have" is just conjecture and open to debate. Source: LDS.org.
Context:
In 1839, Joseph Smith and Elias Higbee met with President Van Buren to discuss issues dealing with the Mormons in Missouri. They also met with various members of Congress to try and sway them to represent the Mormons' cause. This was right after the Missouri-Mormon War of 1838 and the Mormons were soundly defeated and fleeing to Illinois. Joseph and Judge Higbee were met with mixed sympathy and contempt but nothing was done.
Then in 1843, the Times and Seasons--Nauvoo's main news magazine--published an article that said that "the man who will be the most likely to render us assistance in obtaining redress for our grievances." Joseph wrote letters to all of the main candidates explaining the Church's plight. His people--my people--were being literally hunted for their beliefs--Executive Order 44 which ordered the extermination of Mormons in Missouri was finally repealed in 1976--but none of the candidates responded favorably. Only three--Calhoun, Cass and Clay--responded at all.
This is all obviously pre-Civil War but post-Indian Removal. This is also just after the rise of Jacksonian Democracy and "We the People" were finally taking interest in politics and voting en masse. Well, the white male twenty-one-and-olders anyway. Also at this time the Church was building a temple in Nauvoo which--at this time--rivaled Chicago in size.
Platform:
Frustrated by the politics of the time, Joseph decided that he was going to run as a third party candidate. There was no way he was going to win and he knew that. But he also knew that his running for office would call national attention to the hypocrisy of a country that had religious freedom written into its Constitution and allowed religious pogroms at the same time.
So first on his platform was the thing first on his mind. He advocated giving the President the power to send the military to suppress mobs such as were employed during the civil rights movement. That's also a direct refutation of "States' Rights," something that would become a very heated discussion leading up to 1860. Imagine the debates. The POTUS allowed to send an army against American citizens, even a state, grabbing up more and more power? Terrifying.
That last bit was sarcasm, by the way. If mobs persist and the state government fails to find a solution the federal government should have every right to intervene even with military force, though peaceful measures should be sought first.
Another interesting, "power-grabbing" plank was his position on slavery. He called for immediate emancipation of all slaves and hinted at equal voting rights for all races. That was unheard-of. Not even Lincoln--the Great Emancipator--called for that. It's something we're still debating now, actually. But how he planned to carry out the emancipation is interesting. Most Abolitionists demanded that the South just be expected to relinquish their slaves and the South understandably rejected. Imagine buying a particularly expensive slave and then the government telling you to give them up for free. That's a significant financial investment. Race and bigotry aside, that definitely could seem unfair. What Candidate Smith proposed was that Congress buy the slaves' freedom, thus hopefully avoiding a violent conflict between slave-holders and abolitionists.
What was really interesting and unusual about his proposition--and would have been controversial if brought to the national stage--was how he planned on getting the money to buy the slaves. He proposed a pay-cut for Congress from eight to two dollars a day and a cut in the House of Representatives from one representative per whatever-it-was to one per one million and use the surplus--in addition to the sale of public lands--to buy all the slaves. Obviously, this would never have gone through successfully.
Prison reform was also high up there, proclaiming that prisons ought not to be "prisons" but "seminaries of education" where prisoners learned how to be functioning, beneficial members of society. He opposed the death penalty except for public officials who failed to do their duty (like signing an extermination order of citizens). He supported a national bank--another thing that was considered unconstitutional by many lawmakers and "necessary and proper" by others--annexation of Texas and Oregon--with their consent--and spreading and purchasing the country Westward with consent and good relations with the natives. This last position was odd, but it wasn't too absurd for back then. Right from the beginning of colonization there were those that encouraged good, fair relations with the natives and many settlers bought the land they settled on.
The What-If
Joseph Smith was murdered in Carthage Jail before the campaign could even really get going. But what if Brother Joseph had made it to the national scene?
One thing's for sure: he would not have been elected president except by some miracle. He was too darn liberal, though now his positions would be considered quite moderate. The South seceded because we elected liberal Lincoln and he wasn't even calling for abolition, let alone equal rights. Lincoln actually spoke out publicly against immediate, national emancipation and especially equality, though some historians think that that was because he may have just been catering to the national scene.
But all that aside, what if Joseph were elected President?
Probably not much would have turned out differently except the Civil War would have been sooner. The POTUS wields much less power than what media paint him to have and the office wielded much less back then. Most of his policies would not have gained an inch in elitist, racist Congress though since then we have made much more progress. Sure there's still elitists and racists among us, even in power. But they are increasingly the minority. Well, at least the racists.
But all that aside, what if Joseph's policies were enacted?
We would have polygamy still legal. The Mormons would never have had to come out West because the government would have the power to quell mobs and so the Mormon capital would still be Nauvoo or maybe Independence, Missouri. Mormons would have been considered a mainstream religion--which we're still struggling to convince the world of that--and not that weird cult out in Utah. Nauvoo and Independence would be major population centers.
This is all obviously pre-Civil War but post-Indian Removal. This is also just after the rise of Jacksonian Democracy and "We the People" were finally taking interest in politics and voting en masse. Well, the white male twenty-one-and-olders anyway. Also at this time the Church was building a temple in Nauvoo which--at this time--rivaled Chicago in size.
Platform:
Frustrated by the politics of the time, Joseph decided that he was going to run as a third party candidate. There was no way he was going to win and he knew that. But he also knew that his running for office would call national attention to the hypocrisy of a country that had religious freedom written into its Constitution and allowed religious pogroms at the same time.
So first on his platform was the thing first on his mind. He advocated giving the President the power to send the military to suppress mobs such as were employed during the civil rights movement. That's also a direct refutation of "States' Rights," something that would become a very heated discussion leading up to 1860. Imagine the debates. The POTUS allowed to send an army against American citizens, even a state, grabbing up more and more power? Terrifying.
That last bit was sarcasm, by the way. If mobs persist and the state government fails to find a solution the federal government should have every right to intervene even with military force, though peaceful measures should be sought first.
Another interesting, "power-grabbing" plank was his position on slavery. He called for immediate emancipation of all slaves and hinted at equal voting rights for all races. That was unheard-of. Not even Lincoln--the Great Emancipator--called for that. It's something we're still debating now, actually. But how he planned to carry out the emancipation is interesting. Most Abolitionists demanded that the South just be expected to relinquish their slaves and the South understandably rejected. Imagine buying a particularly expensive slave and then the government telling you to give them up for free. That's a significant financial investment. Race and bigotry aside, that definitely could seem unfair. What Candidate Smith proposed was that Congress buy the slaves' freedom, thus hopefully avoiding a violent conflict between slave-holders and abolitionists.
What was really interesting and unusual about his proposition--and would have been controversial if brought to the national stage--was how he planned on getting the money to buy the slaves. He proposed a pay-cut for Congress from eight to two dollars a day and a cut in the House of Representatives from one representative per whatever-it-was to one per one million and use the surplus--in addition to the sale of public lands--to buy all the slaves. Obviously, this would never have gone through successfully.
Prison reform was also high up there, proclaiming that prisons ought not to be "prisons" but "seminaries of education" where prisoners learned how to be functioning, beneficial members of society. He opposed the death penalty except for public officials who failed to do their duty (like signing an extermination order of citizens). He supported a national bank--another thing that was considered unconstitutional by many lawmakers and "necessary and proper" by others--annexation of Texas and Oregon--with their consent--and spreading and purchasing the country Westward with consent and good relations with the natives. This last position was odd, but it wasn't too absurd for back then. Right from the beginning of colonization there were those that encouraged good, fair relations with the natives and many settlers bought the land they settled on.
The What-If
Joseph Smith was murdered in Carthage Jail before the campaign could even really get going. But what if Brother Joseph had made it to the national scene?
One thing's for sure: he would not have been elected president except by some miracle. He was too darn liberal, though now his positions would be considered quite moderate. The South seceded because we elected liberal Lincoln and he wasn't even calling for abolition, let alone equal rights. Lincoln actually spoke out publicly against immediate, national emancipation and especially equality, though some historians think that that was because he may have just been catering to the national scene.
But all that aside, what if Joseph were elected President?
Probably not much would have turned out differently except the Civil War would have been sooner. The POTUS wields much less power than what media paint him to have and the office wielded much less back then. Most of his policies would not have gained an inch in elitist, racist Congress though since then we have made much more progress. Sure there's still elitists and racists among us, even in power. But they are increasingly the minority. Well, at least the racists.
But all that aside, what if Joseph's policies were enacted?
We would have polygamy still legal. The Mormons would never have had to come out West because the government would have the power to quell mobs and so the Mormon capital would still be Nauvoo or maybe Independence, Missouri. Mormons would have been considered a mainstream religion--which we're still struggling to convince the world of that--and not that weird cult out in Utah. Nauvoo and Independence would be major population centers.
Perhaps the country would have become as open to immigration as the church was, accepting anyone as long as they earnestly desired to contribute to society. That could have led to a much more diverse culture than we have now, expanding the definition of "American." Relations with Native Americans would have been much better and maybe much less natives would have been forced onto reservations, at least the ones west of the Mississippi. The eastern tribes had already been removed and I don't know if his platform had anything about restoration in it. Get it?
Slavery would have been abolished and blacks voting soon after. Women's suffrage would not be far behind as we saw in actual history.
And prisons would actually be what they should be.
Conclusion
So would America be better if the first Mormon to run for President had been elected and granted the power that he sought for the office? I think so. I happen to agree with almost every plank, some of which we still have the opportunity before us to implement.
But just because Brother Joseph said it was a good idea for government is not a good enough reason to do it, just like "because the Founding Fathers intended it" isn't. But because it's the best thing for America is.
Conclusion
So would America be better if the first Mormon to run for President had been elected and granted the power that he sought for the office? I think so. I happen to agree with almost every plank, some of which we still have the opportunity before us to implement.
But just because Brother Joseph said it was a good idea for government is not a good enough reason to do it, just like "because the Founding Fathers intended it" isn't. But because it's the best thing for America is.
"Like" Demormocrat on Facebook!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)