Understanding the Electoral College through Eliot's MIDDLEMARCH

[EarlyActs]

In the middle of Eliot's novel from midland England set in the mid 1800s, a young thinker is seeking reform that does not conduct itself violently yet does result in true reform in the country. This character is Ladislaw. To his credit, he disdains the guillotine across the Channel (we must assume that he means the triteness of the justice system involved). What we learn however, is that is very easy to sidestep the necessary safeguards that the US Constitution set in place called the Electoral College.

When a constitution has an EC, the fear is not just of one mob, but of all mobs. The term at the time was 'mobbery' which might remind us of robbery. A cause may seem so just that there is no question about imposing it on the population. Those in favor often wish to 'mob' their way into power and to see a rule reflect them. And one large part of the population may really love it in their location (eg, tradesmen in cities whose only property is their trade-tools, not their homes which they rent). But this actually contains a huge hazard.

As a check and balance, the EC functions with electors of districts and the districts are not based on head-counts, but on locations. There be respect for such balance to preserve rightness and justice in our societies. A ruler who steps in and enacts 15 executive orders in a day is the opposite, and has no regard for the concept of protection which an EC stands for. (It is not the only protection, but is a protection from an election where shear numbers decide.)

As you can see, the illegal immigration to cities combined with the various illegal voting activities (as seen in recent years), is against the Constitutional balances of powers. The fact that it doesn't act in violence in a random disregard is no credit to it.

 

[Josheb]

In the middle of Eliot's novel from midland England set in the mid 1800s, a young thinker is seeking reform that does not conduct itself violently yet does result in true reform in the country. This character is Ladislaw. To his credit, he disdains the guillotine across the Channel (we must assume that he means the triteness of the justice system involved). What we learn however, is that is very easy to sidestep the necessary safeguards that the US Constitution set in place called the Electoral College.

When a constitution has an EC, the fear is not just of one mob, but of all mobs. The term at the time was 'mobbery' which might remind us of robbery. A cause may seem so just that there is no question about imposing it on the population. Those in favor often wish to 'mob' their way into power and to see a rule reflect them. And one large part of the population may really love it in their location (eg, tradesmen in cities whose only property is their trade-tools, not their homes which they rent). But this actually contains a huge hazard.

As a check and balance, the EC functions with electors of districts and the districts are not based on head-counts, but on locations. There be respect for such balance to preserve rightness and justice in our societies. A ruler who steps in and enacts 15 executive orders in a day is the opposite, and has no regard for the concept of protection which an EC stands for. (It is not the only protection, but is a protection from an election where shear numbers decide.)

As you can see, the illegal immigration to cities combined with the various illegal voting activities (as seen in recent years), is against the Constitutional balances of powers. The fact that it doesn't act in violence in a random disregard is no credit to it.

Ooooo...... Let's back up a minute. Anything that violates the Constitution in any way is violence.