Vox Populi, Vox Dei: The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thing that would have been commonly evoked in the Roman Republic, but the earliest known reference to equating it...

Alber

The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thing that would have been commonly evoked in the Roman Republic, but the earliest known reference to equating it with the voice of God (Vox populi, vox Dei)—in a disapproving way—is attributed to Saxon scholar and teacher Alcuin of York (735-804), then Master of the Palace School at Aachen. In a letter to the Emperor Charlemagne in 800, he wrote, “And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always close to insanity.”
Alcuin de York is quite right; but the reality is that somehow matters must be decided; and in the United States, in the Constitution that was adopted to govern the republic in 1787, that voice is recognized to citizens.
However, more than 230 years after this legal body was approved, measures having been implemented to do so, the voice of the people still cannot be heard unequivocally, as it is subject to certain regulations, which can adulterate it and make us hear something very different to what the people really want.
As is well known, the news media do not collect vox populi but the criteria of those who control them, they even conduct surveys to find out the reality; but they influence those surveys and try to adulterate them, succeeding very frequently.
I do not agree with establishing what has been called "politically correct", which is very similar to censorship, but some way must be found for the media to adjust “to inform"; and not “to interpret" the facts, according to a particular convenience. I think that the obligation to publish the fact itself should be legally established and set aside the interpretation it wants to be given to it, clearly establishing which is the fact and which is the interpretation, so that each person can draw their own conclusions and stick to them.
Another important issue is the way in which elections are carried out for positions at the federal level, for Congress and the Presidency. I think that in the same way that the postal service, social security and immigration service are at the federal level, the electoral function for federal offices should be at the federal level and not at the state level; and I also believe that the existing parties must have proportional active participation in the development of this function. On the other hand, I agree with the existence of the electoral college, since it is closely related to the rights of states with a minority population; but I think that the system in which the party that wins in a state, takes all the votes that correspond to that state, is not correct. I think that the votes should be distributed proportionally to the vote obtained, because when the number of senators in the votes corresponding to each state is taken into consideration, the right of the minority is being respected.
Thus, if California has 55 electoral votes and a party obtains 40% of the votes cast, 22 electoral votes will correspond to it and the one that obtained 60% will receive 33. This reduces the difference that may exist between the popular vote and that of the electoral college.
A matter of vital importance is the recognition of those who have the right to vote, since there is no reason for people who have died to appear voting, since there is a death registry that should be connected to the electoral census, automatically reducing the one who has died, thus preventing people from voting who do not have the right to vote or that more votes appear than registered citizens with the right to vote, as has happened in these elections.
The vote is secret; but it is not a secret who has the right to vote. I believe that it is more important to exercise the privilege of voting than that for driving a car; and for the latter, the fingerprints are taken, the signature, a photo and an identification is issued, the same should be done to control the vote. The signature can be a means of ratification, but fingerprint control is easier; and in addition, it would facilitate voting by mail; the fingerprint can be printed, when the shipment is made and also notify the shipment of the vote by postal mail using the telephone with the fingerprint, as well as the code of the control document that accompanies the ballot; of course, with the condition that in order to vote by mail, a deadline must be established, let's say a week before the day of the election, that the votes will be counted as received and that only those votes received by mail, no later than within the first four hours of the day designated for the election and that they appear duly notified, serving this notification to claim the ballots not received in time.
If the measures that I have previously exposed had been followed in the current electoral process, we would not be facing the current situation of uncertainty and discord, since it would not be easy to manipulate the election in any way.
In these elections, not everything is said, since not only the presidential election is at stake, but that of the representatives to the Congress of the states in question, who also appear on the electoral ballots that may or may not be considered; and I estimate that as in baseball, until the last out is given the game is not over.
I remember in 1956 the fifth game between the Dodgers and the Yankees, the perfect game that Don Larsen threw. It was exciting; and in the fifth inning it seemed that he would not make it, when Gil Hodges hit a line to left-center field that Mickey Mantle came to catch, keeping the duel immaculate. For the last out, on a 1-2 count, Larsen sent a fastball that struck out Dale Mitchel to finish his magic act, in which he required 97 pitches.
In the end it will be what God wants, and if he wants to humiliate this country, he will hand it over to his enemies. The truth is that the enemies of the USA: the governments of China, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.- they are celebrating with the possibility of Joe Biden being the new President; and knowing this, another comment is not necessary.
In the Bible we find Isaiah 66.6 the following: "A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies". Which is the closest thing to Vox Populi, Vox Dei. However, within the apocryphal books, Ecclesiastical 10: 2-5 reveals an irrefutable truth, closely related to the Vox Populi: “Every people has the government it deserves. When the king is ignorant, the people end in ruin; when the king is wise, the people prosper".
In democracy we do not have a King, but what has been said is applicable to the President. However, it can be said that democracy, which is the rule of the majority; it depends on the cowardice or bravery, intelligence or stupidity of that majority; and that majority becomes a dangerous weapon when manipulated by unscrupulous people with intelligence for evil.
God willing, the enemies of this country will be mocked and there will be retribution for the damage caused; but the maxim must be followed: "To God asking and the with the mallet hitting". May God enlighten the President!

Mantle

Alber wrote:

The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thing that would have been commonly evoked in the Roman Republic, but the earliest known reference to equating it with the voice of God (Vox populi, vox Dei)—in a disapproving way—is attributed to Saxon scholar and teacher Alcuin of York (735-804), then Master of the Palace School at Aachen. In a letter to the Emperor Charlemagne in 800, he wrote, “And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always close to insanity.”
Alcuin de York is quite right; but the reality is that somehow matters must be decided; and in the United States, in the Constitution that was adopted to govern the republic in 1787, that voice is recognized to citizens.
However, more than 230 years after this legal body was approved, measures having been implemented to do so, the voice of the people still cannot be heard unequivocally, as it is subject to certain regulations, which can adulterate it and make us hear something very different to what the people really want.
As is well known, the news media do not collect vox populi but the criteria of those who control them, they even conduct surveys to find out the reality; but they influence those surveys and try to adulterate them, succeeding very frequently.
I do not agree with establishing what has been called "politically correct", which is very similar to censorship, but some way must be found for the media to adjust “to inform"; and not “to interpret" the facts, according to a particular convenience. I think that the obligation to publish the fact itself should be legally established and set aside the interpretation it wants to be given to it, clearly establishing which is the fact and which is the interpretation, so that each person can draw their own conclusions and stick to them.
Another important issue is the way in which elections are carried out for positions at the federal level, for Congress and the Presidency. I think that in the same way that the postal service, social security and immigration service are at the federal level, the electoral function for federal offices should be at the federal level and not at the state level; and I also believe that the existing parties must have proportional active participation in the development of this function. On the other hand, I agree with the existence of the electoral college, since it is closely related to the rights of states with a minority population; but I think that the system in which the party that wins in a state, takes all the votes that correspond to that state, is not correct. I think that the votes should be distributed proportionally to the vote obtained, because when the number of senators in the votes corresponding to each state is taken into consideration, the right of the minority is being respected.
Thus, if California has 55 electoral votes and a party obtains 40% of the votes cast, 22 electoral votes will correspond to it and the one that obtained 60% will receive 33. This reduces the difference that may exist between the popular vote and that of the electoral college.
A matter of vital importance is the recognition of those who have the right to vote, since there is no reason for people who have died to appear voting, since there is a death registry that should be connected to the electoral census, automatically reducing the one who has died, thus preventing people from voting who do not have the right to vote or that more votes appear than registered citizens with the right to vote, as has happened in these elections.
The vote is secret; but it is not a secret who has the right to vote. I believe that it is more important to exercise the privilege of voting than that for driving a car; and for the latter, the fingerprints are taken, the signature, a photo and an identification is issued, the same should be done to control the vote. The signature can be a means of ratification, but fingerprint control is easier; and in addition, it would facilitate voting by mail; the fingerprint can be printed, when the shipment is made and also notify the shipment of the vote by postal mail using the telephone with the fingerprint, as well as the code of the control document that accompanies the ballot; of course, with the condition that in order to vote by mail, a deadline must be established, let's say a week before the day of the election, that the votes will be counted as received and that only those votes received by mail, no later than within the first four hours of the day designated for the election and that they appear duly notified, serving this notification to claim the ballots not received in time.
If the measures that I have previously exposed had been followed in the current electoral process, we would not be facing the current situation of uncertainty and discord, since it would not be easy to manipulate the election in any way.
In these elections, not everything is said, since not only the presidential election is at stake, but that of the representatives to the Congress of the states in question, who also appear on the electoral ballots that may or may not be considered; and I estimate that as in baseball, until the last out is given the game is not over.
I remember in 1956 the fifth game between the Dodgers and the Yankees, the perfect game that Don Larsen threw. It was exciting; and in the fifth inning it seemed that he would not make it, when Gil Hodges hit a line to left-center field that Mickey Mantle came to catch, keeping the duel immaculate. For the last out, on a 1-2 count, Larsen sent a fastball that struck out Dale Mitchel to finish his magic act, in which he required 97 pitches.
In the end it will be what God wants, and if he wants to humiliate this country, he will hand it over to his enemies. The truth is that the enemies of the USA: the governments of China, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.- they are celebrating with the possibility of Joe Biden being the new President; and knowing this, another comment is not necessary.
In the Bible we find Isaiah 66.6 the following: "A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies". Which is the closest thing to Vox Populi, Vox Dei. However, within the apocryphal books, Ecclesiastical 10: 2-5 reveals an irrefutable truth, closely related to the Vox Populi: “Every people has the government it deserves. When the king is ignorant, the people end in ruin; when the king is wise, the people prosper".
In democracy we do not have a King, but what has been said is applicable to the President. However, it can be said that democracy, which is the rule of the majority; it depends on the cowardice or bravery, intelligence or stupidity of that majority; and that majority becomes a dangerous weapon when manipulated by unscrupulous people with intelligence for evil.
God willing, the enemies of this country will be mocked and there will be retribution for the damage caused; but the maxim must be followed: "To God asking and the with the mallet hitting". May God enlighten the President!

The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thin... (show quote)

What an exquisite post! I salute you, Alber!

Hug

Alber wrote:

The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thing that would have been commonly evoked in the Roman Republic, but the earliest known reference to equating it with the voice of God (Vox populi, vox Dei)—in a disapproving way—is attributed to Saxon scholar and teacher Alcuin of York (735-804), then Master of the Palace School at Aachen. In a letter to the Emperor Charlemagne in 800, he wrote, “And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always close to insanity.”
Alcuin de York is quite right; but the reality is that somehow matters must be decided; and in the United States, in the Constitution that was adopted to govern the republic in 1787, that voice is recognized to citizens.
However, more than 230 years after this legal body was approved, measures having been implemented to do so, the voice of the people still cannot be heard unequivocally, as it is subject to certain regulations, which can adulterate it and make us hear something very different to what the people really want.
As is well known, the news media do not collect vox populi but the criteria of those who control them, they even conduct surveys to find out the reality; but they influence those surveys and try to adulterate them, succeeding very frequently.
I do not agree with establishing what has been called "politically correct", which is very similar to censorship, but some way must be found for the media to adjust “to inform"; and not “to interpret" the facts, according to a particular convenience. I think that the obligation to publish the fact itself should be legally established and set aside the interpretation it wants to be given to it, clearly establishing which is the fact and which is the interpretation, so that each person can draw their own conclusions and stick to them.
Another important issue is the way in which elections are carried out for positions at the federal level, for Congress and the Presidency. I think that in the same way that the postal service, social security and immigration service are at the federal level, the electoral function for federal offices should be at the federal level and not at the state level; and I also believe that the existing parties must have proportional active participation in the development of this function. On the other hand, I agree with the existence of the electoral college, since it is closely related to the rights of states with a minority population; but I think that the system in which the party that wins in a state, takes all the votes that correspond to that state, is not correct. I think that the votes should be distributed proportionally to the vote obtained, because when the number of senators in the votes corresponding to each state is taken into consideration, the right of the minority is being respected.
Thus, if California has 55 electoral votes and a party obtains 40% of the votes cast, 22 electoral votes will correspond to it and the one that obtained 60% will receive 33. This reduces the difference that may exist between the popular vote and that of the electoral college.
A matter of vital importance is the recognition of those who have the right to vote, since there is no reason for people who have died to appear voting, since there is a death registry that should be connected to the electoral census, automatically reducing the one who has died, thus preventing people from voting who do not have the right to vote or that more votes appear than registered citizens with the right to vote, as has happened in these elections.
The vote is secret; but it is not a secret who has the right to vote. I believe that it is more important to exercise the privilege of voting than that for driving a car; and for the latter, the fingerprints are taken, the signature, a photo and an identification is issued, the same should be done to control the vote. The signature can be a means of ratification, but fingerprint control is easier; and in addition, it would facilitate voting by mail; the fingerprint can be printed, when the shipment is made and also notify the shipment of the vote by postal mail using the telephone with the fingerprint, as well as the code of the control document that accompanies the ballot; of course, with the condition that in order to vote by mail, a deadline must be established, let's say a week before the day of the election, that the votes will be counted as received and that only those votes received by mail, no later than within the first four hours of the day designated for the election and that they appear duly notified, serving this notification to claim the ballots not received in time.
If the measures that I have previously exposed had been followed in the current electoral process, we would not be facing the current situation of uncertainty and discord, since it would not be easy to manipulate the election in any way.
In these elections, not everything is said, since not only the presidential election is at stake, but that of the representatives to the Congress of the states in question, who also appear on the electoral ballots that may or may not be considered; and I estimate that as in baseball, until the last out is given the game is not over.
I remember in 1956 the fifth game between the Dodgers and the Yankees, the perfect game that Don Larsen threw. It was exciting; and in the fifth inning it seemed that he would not make it, when Gil Hodges hit a line to left-center field that Mickey Mantle came to catch, keeping the duel immaculate. For the last out, on a 1-2 count, Larsen sent a fastball that struck out Dale Mitchel to finish his magic act, in which he required 97 pitches.
In the end it will be what God wants, and if he wants to humiliate this country, he will hand it over to his enemies. The truth is that the enemies of the USA: the governments of China, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.- they are celebrating with the possibility of Joe Biden being the new President; and knowing this, another comment is not necessary.
In the Bible we find Isaiah 66.6 the following: "A voice of noise from the city, a voice from the temple, a voice of the LORD that rendereth recompence to his enemies". Which is the closest thing to Vox Populi, Vox Dei. However, within the apocryphal books, Ecclesiastical 10: 2-5 reveals an irrefutable truth, closely related to the Vox Populi: “Every people has the government it deserves. When the king is ignorant, the people end in ruin; when the king is wise, the people prosper".
In democracy we do not have a King, but what has been said is applicable to the President. However, it can be said that democracy, which is the rule of the majority; it depends on the cowardice or bravery, intelligence or stupidity of that majority; and that majority becomes a dangerous weapon when manipulated by unscrupulous people with intelligence for evil.
God willing, the enemies of this country will be mocked and there will be retribution for the damage caused; but the maxim must be followed: "To God asking and the with the mallet hitting". May God enlighten the President!

The term “vox populi” sounds like the sort of thin... (show quote)

Good post!