They often are the kind of people that either commit
suicide: pop out, cop out, drop out, or wind up joining the group
to get an identity. And then I went on to point out that certain
groups appeal to True Believers and I talked about which groups?
Hairy Krishna, Moonies, you know, cults, and sometimes other
kinds of groups and that sometimes they get concerned and feel
again that their group, is being attacked and so the group
commits suicide in mass. And we talked in that case about the
People's Temple in 1978 perhaps the most notorious case in our
history where nine hundred plus individuals either committed
suicide or was suicided by their leaders and then after they
murdered a congressman and some other people who came down there
on an investigatory trip because the congressman name was Ryan -
daughter had joined the particular cult.
Now like many groups of that nature, I pointed out they
become quite -- well -- this is because they have free labor,
but there is another advantage of these groups is that when you
have free labor you can order them as a leader to work under the
political process. Translation -- walking precincts going door
to door. Stamping envelopes, getting on the phone. All of this
is mandatory to any decent campaign and it is mostly boring work
for their volunteers. To do this grunt labor, but when you can
order people to do it you got a lot of power in that group. And
Temple was an example. They were left-wing group. In this, their
political philosophy, if they're really anything, besides the
leaders organization, um, were very active in San Francisco
democratic politics and were getting tremendous support from
individuals in San Francisco including Mayor Moscone before he
was assasinated. And when it was identified how much of a cult
they were and what kind of brain washing and control went on,
that's when they left to set up a colony in South America in
Guinea and they're creating this People's Temple, not People's
Temple, but Jonestown and some groups are still very large and
very active politically with a lot of money to donate to
campaigns and people such is the Unification Church which are
And of course there are other groups who have put pressure.
One of the biggest now is scientology because they still do a
lot of ads with the Dianetics and L. Ron Hubbard. Um, of course
as I say, you don't necessarily to be a person to belong to
some of these groups and scientology is renowned for some of
it's well-known figures. And one of them, John Travolta, as you
know, it is argued that he made a deal with President Clinton
in so that when he did Clinton's role in Primary Colors he
would calm it down from the book so that Clinton would put
pressure on the German government because the German government
had ban any members of scientology from working in the German
Did any of you hear any of this at all about the German
governments actions? You did? I just want to validate that I'm
not making this up. And the fact is that that can't be proven,
that Primary Colors, people say that he did play it down from
the book, but I think he played an outstanding job. How many of
you saw Primary Colors? I recommend renting it it's much better
than I thought originally. I had thought that wag the Dog would
be great. And that was it was a fun film, but it wasn't
extremely clever although we begin to think that that's really
what went on in Iraq and everything, but Primary Colors was
surprising to me. It is a biography of Clinton. Although they
don't say it in the film. Obviously. Did you like it? I didn't
see it. You got to see it. Yeah. I am. How about you? I enjoyed
it. John Travolta did an excellent job. It's amazing to me.
Sometimes the guy comes through solid.
Um, and of course what other individuals are members of
scientology? Isn't Tom Cruise? I've heard he is, and, um,
Kirstie Alley. Those are the three that are, but it is true
that they have put pressure directly not necessarily as a deal
with Clinton, but they actually met with Clinton to put
pressure on the Hollywood people because he knows a lot of his
funding comes out of Hollywood to put pressure on the German
government so that part at least is valid whether or not that
could be internet conspiracy paranoia.
All right what's the problem with cults, if you will, True
Believers? They're very dangerous if they get to power. Because
there is a sense of paranoia. And therefore, they are more
eliminators then they are converters. I talked about people have
a true faith. And if they have a true faith then they're solid
in their faith and they don't feel threatened. But True
Believers are constantly threatened by anybody who challenges
their point of view and that explains in part why there was a
difference between Hitler and Mussolini. Hitler was a True
Believer. He came from a lost world. His own family and
everything else and basically he was a street person, if you
will. Where Mussolini came to fascism intellectually,
anaytitically academically which was different in the emotion of
Hitler and I think it is seen in the point that well the
philosophies were similar as we indicated, Nazi Germany was
willing to eliminate and Mussolini was opposed to that although
he believed in creating an elite societv returning
to the Roman Emnire concept.
And to do so. one of the first
thing, you know, one of the things he did to expand the Roman
Empire first to invade the nation of Abyssinia. What country
is that in? Ethiopia. And the emperor of Ethiopia at the time,
anybody know the name? HALLAI SALASSIE. (not
sure on the spelling) Is it an important name? Only because
many people like to listen to raegae music. Still people
listen to raeqae. Some younger people -- and um
raegae often bands are made up of rasta -- and they happen to
believe in their church that they, that HALLAY SALASSIE was the
messiah and was sent down to the second coming of Christ. Of
course their host, their wafer in the Rastafarian group is pot.
So that's the way they celebrate their
I'll never forget when I was in Jamaica. This guy comes
over to me and he says, "Hey Mr. Mafia, want to buy some pot?"
1 guess I looked real Italian that day or something. No, I did
not. I'm not stupid enough to wind up in a Jamaican prison,
besides, I don't smoke it anyway. That's irrelevant. But -- one
of the things you don't want to do overseas is wind up in a
overseas prison. Well, I mean you're lost. You've seen what's
happened? You see some of the films about prisons in Turkey
where that kid got put in there for God knows how long?
Midnight Express was it? The old one or the 'Return To
Paradise? Where he was locked in prison and, you know, the only
thing about it was that that hit me was that it finally made
sense that one of the bits
that Jim Carey did in one of his movies which was one of the
scenes in the girlfriend in this film. No more movies reviews today
Well, during the structure of the course last week and the
week before, we've been banting around a number of forms of
government. We mentioned anarchy, which means? There is no
government. Now I identified that communism, socialism and
capitalism shouldn't be governed in my mind. What did I
say they were? Economic. Yeah. Economy. They're economic
systems. They functioning under different systems. However, I
tried to identify to you that there is a socialism in this
country and that communism is a different form of socialism in
the Soviet Union. What kind of a system do we generally say that
communism fits into? what is the political system not of the
ideal communism anarchy but the communism in the Soviet Union
what do we usually refer to the system that existed in the
Soviet Union as? Socialism? No. We just said socialism,
communism, or economic system, but what was the -- dictatorship
of what? Of the communist party, yeah. We could call it a
dictatorship and we have a bigger word. Well, again oligarchy.
what does that mean? Ruled by the few. Now these words do appear
on the word list, so in case you think we're just rapping again
and people are talking and answering questions. I think the
problem I have in my classes and people are answering questions
and not important to put on their notes. Yeah it's there. We're
not going to hear all the notebooks opening and the pens
rustling or computers? You hear me typing a bit over here. All
Um, another word besides oligarchy which means rule by
the few -- it's a big word. Totalitarian. We use this to
refer to government like the Soviet Union. We lumped them
into a system. Okay the word totalitarian within it the
meaning which is total control. In a totalitarian system
you need a definition and I know you like definitions -- one
individual or a group have total control over the institutions
of government. An individual or a group has total control over
the institution of government. All right? What do I mean by
institution of government? Or society? Anybody? What's an
institution? Be it a mental institution? Well this school is an
institution. Education or the institution of education.
Religion, churches are listed as institutions. The military is
an institution. And when you have control over those kinds of
groups the military the schools the religion the churches, um,
you've got fairly strong control over everything that's going
on in the country over the congress that's an institution. Over
However, I add to the definition is that should be there
because I think it makes more clearer the reason for the total
control is usually because there's an ideology. it means a
philosophy acting on it. Philosophy in action. However, the
ideology for Soviet Union was communism. The ideology for Hitler
Germany was Nazism. Mussolini was fascism. When there's no
ideology, and it's almost total control, we have another word we
use when this is a dictator that just rules and controls the
country and that one is authoritarian. You have basic total
control because of your power. But in a totalitarian system if
the dictator leaves, the whole thing changes. Arbitrarily
following the concept
of the dictator. In a totalitarian system, if the dictator or
the person running the country dies, the totalitarian system
continues under generally the same philosophy with no new
leaders such as occurred for, you know, seventy years plus in
the Soviet Union.
Any questions on the difference? And it's tough to define
today, but can you give an example of a totalitarian stem? Well
Cuba and China are still totalitarian. They have an ideology
although Cuba may lien towards authoritarian; why? Because we
always identify it with Castro and if Castro were to leave,
would the system continue? And many feel it would, but would it
have twenty years ago? Maybe. Because communism is sort of
sitting on a death bed now. So I don't no. However, where will
you name as an authoritarian system today? What country? Where
you have a dictator but there doesn't seem to be much of a
philosophy? I don't understand the dictators total control.
China, maybe? No. China's totalitarian because in China you do
have Marxism and communism and the dictators do not stand out
even in the sense of although we know their names within
limitations. I think Iraq. Sure. However, by the way Iraq was
found on a philosophy, and um, I have two Iraq students in my
afternoon classes. They were amazed that I knew anything about
Iraq and the Barth party and the revolution that took place
before Saddam Hussein took over. That was Anrt of the a national
socialism similar to Hitler
philosophy in the sense of what we called and we saw in
Argentina under Peron.
we have socialist philosophies. A Secular Arab world
that a lot of the people are not familiar with. What I'm
saying is if it is possible even if we got rid of Saddam
Hussein in the Desert Storm, the Hundred Hour war, whatever
the hell it was, the fact was I'm not sure the country would
have changed if the Barth party was able to maintain.
Another person there because they may be functioning around
an ideology of this revolution although that exists in both
Syria and Iraq and in Jordan. which is a secular
dictatorship is being challenges today by the fundamental
Muslim groups like -- what is the fundamental Muslim group?
And also is the PLO, by the way is also a secular
organization. Translation -- means it has a world
philosophy, does not emphasize or approach religion. They
believe in creating a world government. Without religion in
other words, separation of church and state and that is
being challenged by fundamentalist groups today. So Iraq is
being challenged by those groups. And it is confronted two
strong groups; one nationalistic, one not as one is the
Shiite in southern Iraq. Iran -- and Iran is Shiite. Well
who's the group in the southern part that the Americans are
protecting? I'm not sure. well, no, the Kurds are in other
words. The Kurds are on the border of Turkey and the
forth. And that is more of a religious group.
in fact, apparently, the chief terrorist has been arrested
by the Greek government, taken out of maybe it was -- he was
in the Greek embassy and they refused it and they let the
Turkish government take him and in their demonstrations around
the world Greek embassies yesterday.
They said recently -- it was in the paper -- a tiny article
-- I guess -- had a conflict along the Turkish border and killed
a thousand or something. A Yeah. The Turks are quote/unquote
friends. But the Turks have been notorious for eliminating
racial groups in their -- ever since Turks killed millions of
Armenians. They were very strong Armenian terrorists groups the
Kurds also had been fighting against the Turks. However, we are
not protecting the Kurds in the Turkish lands. we're protecting
them in Iraq. So times I wonder sometimes obviously when we call
real politics. Even though there may not be a Soviet Union, the
same story prevails. Our friends are our friends and what they
do is irrelevant, but when our enemies do it or people we
perceive as our enemies then it's time to step in and well, blow
up those countries or those areas.
So the new world order is reflective of who we allay
ourselves with. Do you think it can be argued that we're
turning into a fascist government ourselves? fascist Though not
in the sense of you mean international fascism? Um, I don't
think we have the kind of racial identity that fascism
holds. We have a nationalistic identity, yes. Which is a
little different then what would be called a fascist or
authoritarian system. Certainly, it's I don't know. I'm
not sure I can even give a word for it. But I don't think
fascism would be -- not only a fascism used wrong, but
the United States is not attempting to push the countries
into a right-wing racial dictatorship with their national
identity. What we try to do is maintain and expand the
American Empire which is a little different and in the
meantime while we're expanding, it welds like to make it all
like us. And that's probably better said under a term that
was used by the Russians communists many years back. We are,
you know, expanding American imperialism. And I can -- yes
imperialistic, I would buy. Under the new world order.
Fascist? No. Fascism has a very strong regional
connontation to it.
Oligarchy, anarchy, what other -garchy? What other forms of
government can you think of? Monarchy. Means? Run by a certain
family? Not usually monarchy, maybe a family but it's an
inherited rule, usually. It's not always of a king or queen.
it's usually within the family. Yeah. I guess we could say with
the family. Because it's not always inherited. Sometimes in the
sense that it's not always the son. Sometimes it's an elected
monarchy. They are, you know, Saudi Arabia has an election. So
maybe family is a better term. Already two types of monarchies
talked about them. One is constitutional and the other is
absolute monarchy. Most countries today are limit or
constitutional monarchies. That's difficult to do too an
absolute Where the king has close to total say over what goes
on in the country. Interestingly one of those that is being
very absolute or almost absolute, better said, almost absolute
is Jordan. And I say it is because we have had a transformation
of power because King Hussein of Jordan died last week and made
a choice. He himself appointed his successor. Shows you the
kind of power that he has over the choice that was made. So
there is a lot of the power in the King of Jordan, but the old -
- of the King Louis the 14th where he said, "I am the state."
and he meant that everything he did was he it and the people
did not question it. That's very difficult to locate today.
Monaco is close to being absolute monarchy.
Okay what other countries? What other forms of government?
What other government? Any other words that we can think of
referring to a government? Any of the -archy? Bureaucracy.
You're forgetting the biggest one. Democracy. Democracy. we'll
talk more about that obviously this week, but democracy is
government by the people. Government is the -- and people is
demo- and government -cracy. Of course we say of the people,
for the people. But it simply means government for the people
and note, what is England? Well we say it's a monarchy, but is
it a monarchy. Yeah it is.
England is a constitutional monarchy. It's also a
democracy. How do we differ between ourselves and England
democracy? what makes -- what's the word we used to
separate ours from England. The word is republic. In
reality the we have a republic. what does Canada have?
You've heard of the country Canada? Boy, of our is it
republic? No Canada isn't a republic. They still recognize
the queen though. in fact, up until last year the queen had
veto power over the constitutional amendments. It's a common
wealth under the queen. And so it is a monarchist. With
you, it's also a democracy. So Canada has a democratic
government. The queen -- and recognized. I don't know if she
still appears on the stamps or on the coins of Canada but -
she does? Yeah. And yet interesting too we'll talk
more about -- let me hold on to that and Mexico is what?
They're a democracy, too aren't they? That could be
question, but they would say so. Have it certainly is a
republic. There's no monarchy. It is a party dictatorship or
at least has been of a one party system, a party of the
revolution institution as we referred to it. However there
has been challenges made in the many years of Mexico. There
have been free elections. It used to be that in Mexico that
the results were announced beforehand, before the booths
were even closed so you had an oligarchy during much a part
of the federal stem of Mexico.
voted for the person. where was that? It was just in the paper
last week. 99.9 percent? Now come on. There's no way in any
election. This where in the world you will get 99.9 percent. So
you weren't about what they were doing and of course -it's a
referendum in the sense of what we call -you vote yes or no.
And so yes or no, voted yes. That other percent has been
eliminated. Shot down; away with. Where the heck was that? Is
it possible to say that the government of Mexico is not -- I
did a paper on it a couple months back and we had a huge
argument in class about how to -- in the same topic, but every
time we considered what the form of government it could be the
comments about all of the bribery that takes place and how
certain groups have more power that be others always added in
the conversation and change our minds. Well, I mean people make
the same comment about the United States.
Obviously Clinton is down there now trying to get Mexico to
put pressure in the government officials that are involved
coming out of the drug trade and the former itself brother, but
for the fact that he made billions of dollars in Swiss banks.
He's now out of the country, but was put away because of
connections to his brother. Well, I mean what I said is as I
indicated, it is a party oligarchy and if you get to the
control of that party then you have what we would call no the
possibility of corruption certain president's have moved in
there and tried to reform it.
Others have been too content by the culture of in Mexico.
So in a sense, the word oligarchy is probably the best
for Mexico. It has elements of democracy, but it doesn't have
a strong democratic tradition.
Theocracy; what does it mean? What is it? Yeah? it's
religion, the religious and political leaders are in one in the
same. it's ruled by religion, if you will. It's government by
religion. NOW we distinguish between a theocracy is where the
religious here are pretty much the same. where is this a
political and religious leaders the same? The pope. is the
Vatican a separate country? Yeah, it is? it's considered a
separate country is so the pope is the political and religious
although throughout the rest of the world he is simply a
religious leader. He is not the leader of Catholics elsewhere.
Where else is there -- would Saudi Arabia be considered?
Saudi is more theocratic in that there isn't the head of the
religious. They got their prayer leaders which is true of the
faith. The whatever the word is for the -- however, there's no
doubt that it is theocratic in that the Koran is the main book
of law if not the only book. So the country is run totally
under religious friends. So it's again -it's laying terms with
How about Iran? It is probably still a theocracy in that
the Ayatolla has been and the new is the final word in what
goes on. You can say what you want. The prime
minister can say what they want. It looks like it's
representative government at times, but, you know, not just
the Muslims involved, but the prayer leaders. But there you
have a structure, head of the country, that is the Iaatola.
Yeah, so Iran is a definite theocracy. Again there are a lot
of theocratic systems. Some are stronger than others. There
have been the paper -- heard on the news -demonstrations this
past week in Israel. Two hundred thousand Jews turned out to
demonstrate against the Israeli Supreme Court. Their laws have
been dominated by the ultra orthodox, the fundamentalist Jews.
To the extent that they determined who is Jewish, most of the
laws, everything was closed on Saturday, the Jewish Sabbath.
No businesses are allowed to be open.
But the vast majority of Israelis are secular even those
that are not Jewish and there are other Jewish groups which are
the conservative and reform. Well the Israeli said that
Orthodox Jews can now be drafted into the military so they've
lost their exemption. By the way, many of the Jews don't
recognize the state of the Israeli. They don't belief they
should have a secular government at all which is interesting
and they also indicate that the communal farms and factories, I
guess, but the communes in Israel now can actually sell their
products on the Sabbath. Those are among the decisions and so
created a threat outpouring among the orthodox Jews in two
separate demonstrations because in
unorthodox Judaism women are not allow to pray and demonstrate
with the men. And across the street from them in Israel showing
how democratic it really can be were the secular Jews and tens
of thousands strong young men and women wearing ear rings and
spiked hair and jeans and so the combination just shows the
democracy that does exist there yet, even though it is
democratic, it is very much theocratic.
Similar perhaps to the state of the Utah where the Mormon -
- Utah does have a certain amount of control over the laws of
Utah, but much the governor of Utah is not the head of Mormom
church and today in Utah, many more laws are being passed,
often to the regret of the very strict Mormons. Q A
what's the difference between theocracy and theocratic?
Is that in a theocracy the religious and political
leader are the same. In a theocratic society, religion
dominates but you have separating leaders of church and
state. Okay? Any other forms of government -cracys
that you can think of? Any words? Well, Aristocracy? And
the -- and is usually determined by blood. The word is the
best is the way rule by the best. Are lots of that are out
there but the one that appears in the papers is plutocracy.
Does anybody know what that means? Okay that's ruled by
Mickey Mouse's dog. Plutocracy comes from the Greek word
Pluto which refers to wealth. It means ruled by the wealthy
and you will often hear the word plutocat. Meaning wealthy
class. It has nothing to do with the God of under world or Mickey
Mouse's dog Pluto. I don't understand how Mickey Mouse could
also have a dog and a friend that's a dog. If Pluto's a dog,
what's goofy? What was that movie?
I guess that's most of the biggies, a lot of little ones,
but those are the ones that seem to pop in and out. Now
government are also structured differently and usually we refer
to the structure in three ways -- unitary, federal and
confederal. What are we? Federal. Fair enough. Simple enough.
It wasn't a trick question. When we say we're federal, how do
we identify it as being federal? What do we mean by federal? We
have like one central government also smaller governments
within that and although many other unitary and that, what's
the difference between our central government and our
subdivisions? They're not all powerful. The central government
are not all powerful. Translation: It's a sharing of power.
So in a federal system you have a sharing of power between
the federal or central government and the subdivision. We call
our subdivisions states. Why didn't I just say states? Because
some countries don't call them states. What's Canada -- which
law takes authority if there's the federal one overrides it,
right? Constitution says basically federal constitutional law
supersedes and if the law can, then that does not necessarily
federal government can pass legislation that is in the realm of
the states responsibility.
For example, the federal could pass legislation setting a
speed limit, but they couldn't tell the states what speed limit.
So how come we all had a 55 mile an hour speed limit? Because
the federal government because unless they did, they would lose
federal funding. Isn't that also why the drinking age is 21?
Federal funding for roads would have been cut, and of course
that runs into the whole questions of drugs. Um, better said,
legalizing marijuana. Like the California can create a legalize
marijuana initiative and it is legal in California, but since
doctors prescriptions are regulated in nationally, doctors can
lose their right to write prescriptions if they prescribe
marijuana and also because drugs are under usually
transportation across state boundaries than the federal
government can come in so that's one that's being put in the
courts right now. To what extent? And that hasn't fully been
decided at the level yet.
Okay but the federal government has been coming in after to
break up the clubs and others that are dealing with federal
laws. So they definitely are overlapsed in conflicts that are
difficult to resolve until the Supreme Court states it. Now, it
is also true that the state can go further in it's laws. So that
if the federal law creates a minimum the state can do more. For
example? Gun control.
Federal laws create a five-day waiting period, but in California
you have a ten-day waiting period. So we can go greater. But we
could not create a law with a one-day waiting period. Um, the
Sixth Amendment -- I'm sorry -- the Sixth Article of the Federal
Constitution says it's called the Supremacy Clause says that
federal constitutional law supersedes state law and that's under
the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution.
Now, it is true that we have become closer to being
unitary. You mentioned two of them. We mentioned two of them
just driving speeds and drinking. Okay. Much more so than when I
was your age. Obviously, when I was your age -drinking was in
many states. I lived near Ohio and they used to come from
Indiana to drive over to Ohio because Ohio allowed 3/2 beer at
eighteen and Indiana -- well, in 3/2 beer until I went out of
Ohio because you could drink at 18 in New York. Okay? Those
kinds of things today have created tremendous differences making
us more unitary where unitary meaning that the purests in the
central government with little or no power in the subdivisions.
The power rests in the central government in the subdivisions.
And sometimes it's difficult for people from a foreign country
to understand that we have fifty separate countries. But
sometimes they act as it. Laws for marriage laws, for divorce,
different education laws, different driving laws, different -- I
mean, it was the strangest thing for me to
make a right turn on a red light. I still get -- because I grew
up in New York and you're not allowed to. Hong Kong's the same.
You can't turn right on red either. Do you drive an the right
side of the street in Hong Kong? Right. Not like the British?
Oh, yeah we're the same as British. But it's the wrong side of
the street, not the right side. Sorry.
I was going to say, 3/2 beer is no longer in existence,
right? No it's still out there. What is a 3/2 beer? It's limited
to the percentage of the alcohol per limitation so it's a very
low alcohol content almost at the level of near beer which has no
alcohol content. Why is it you have to be -- O'Douls, the
nonalcoholic beer. Yeah but you have to drink four 12-packs to
get drunk. I don't know. I remember this kid down the street at
thirteen was walking around with a thing of near beer which it
tastes like beer. it has yeast in it and it was amazing one day
about three months later, he came out with this beer belly at
13. I'm looking at this kid. Then he changed. Then he got on
steroids and -- SO. He had his near beer and steroids. He had a
beer belly with cuts. I wish I were joking. I'm not. Funny as
hell. But yeah. There's -- they pop it with caffeine another
drug and then they kept a percentage of cocaine in it. So I just
want you to know that you coke addicts are coke addicts. That's
what you call stream of consciousness thinking. You know, just
the mind pops into all of these
interesting -- um, let's see, confederal. Oh, where is where is
from a unitary system. Where is there that is unitary? Central
government has control with little or no control in the
subdivisions. Where is unitary? England They are now working
through a big word that we learned the other day. Devolution; to
bring down that system, but England has been unitary. You can run
for office in England from anywhere in the country, you don't
have to live there. who wants to run the most recent that wants
to -run for senator is whom? I'll give you a hint: Sey wants to
run for senator in New York city. Hillary Clinton. She has
announced that she is going to run for the vacated seat. She has,
to best of my knowledge, never lived in New York. And Madeline
Allbright from Czechoslovakia. Yeah she found out a few years
back that she was of actual Jewish orgin that her parents are
converted to Catholicism or whatever it was and then left the
country and she didn't know about the Jewish background. But
yeah she's from Czechoslovakia, so
she couldn't run for president. I mean for -- she could run for
senator though. when you get to -- so it is a very good chance
that you will be seeing an interesting campaign with Hillary
Clinton running for senator from New York it looks like a
foregone conclusion. Bill's comment was that he thought -- who
was the other carpet bagger? Hoard Stern? No. He's a New Yorker.
Born, bread, and acts still like a New Yorker. with that accent
and that personality? That's
a New York personality. Did he run for governor or
senator? Governor. Maybe two seconds, he dropped
Now who was elected senator from New York that was a
carpet bagger? Robert Kennedy. Massachusetts. The whole
Kennedy family. New York had an opening. Kennedys had a
townhouse on Park Avenue that they vacationed in. Can you
imagine somebody wants to come from Massachusetts is and
vacation in New York? And so there was an address there
and so he was able to run. So I am very curious as to
what kind of residency Hillary Clinton. How many of you
heard that Hillary Clinton was considering to run for the
senator? So it has been out. It just didn't click when I
was talking about her being a foreigner, I guess. But
she's from what state? Arkansas? Illinois. No, not
Arkansas. She's from Arkansas now. So that will be a very
The real question is that after she becomes senator
from New York, not necessarily foregone conclusion, will
she divorce Bill Clinton or not? Weren't they about to do
it before he became president? I don't know if they ever
did it. That's why he did Monica Lewinsky. No, I'm sorry.
Go ahead. I read something on tabloid newspaper. They had
gone through problems: One of bimbos that he was knocking
around with. Only one of them? Well that was the time -
well no. He had a woman that was for a number of years.
Jennifer Flowers. Before Paula Jones and Jennifer -yeah.
So that was during the times that they said there were
the marriage and it wasn't an issue such as was obviously when
we talk about Paula Jones which may have been in a sense sexual
harassment, but certainly a clearer case of Monica Lewinsky
because -- in any case, the fact is that it will be interesting
to see what happens. They both said that she's been the power
behind the thrown anyway.
I just read a funny quote a couple of days ago from Hillary
Clinton. She said, "They can't impeach us. We're the
president." It's not a real quote, in case you didn't know
that. I wouldn't doubt it was real. Are you sure? It sounds
pretty -- No she's a senator to play into the hands of those
that call her the president. Everyone has stupid moments
though. I'm not sure about her. Well I guess since Bill's pants
are around his ankles, she wears the pants. All these Clinton
jokes. There must be dozens of jokes. The funny part is that
most of them had been used before in relationship to other
presidents. And they just changed the name. I've seen some of
same jokes on LBJ and there's a whole series of them that you
change and they fit in. Lady Bird Johnson had the same and
probably with just as much validity. And of course we used to
joke about Nancy Reagan whispering in Ronald Reagan's ears.
Well he does now. Back then he was just forgetful. Well, hey,
the older you get, the more you realize how forgetful you can
become. Not just being an absent-minded professor. So he got
elected at the ripe old age of 69 and that's an age where your
gone, but which is quite different from Alszheimers. Although I
have to admit, I'm coming down with Alzheimers. What class is
that? I don't know, but it's over. Hey, don't forget that.
Can't convince me. You might be able to convince me. I still
know we go to a quarter after. Okay.
Confederation. When that's -- when what's left? The power
is in the subdivisions with no power in the central government. Power
is in the subdivisions with no power toward little power in the
central government. Um, I can't think of a country today that we
could call confederal. Perhaps the closest is Switzerland where
the cantons they take turns at being president. Or sorry, prime
ministers. Each one is little more I said than our state.
However, in American history we had two confederations. Does
anybody know what those two were? The confederacy in the south.
During the war with Britain, the revolutionary war and until
the Constitution was put into effect in 1789 the United States
functioned under the Articles of Confederation. We took the
name United States in 1777. We declared our independence from
Britain in what year? What date? July 4th, 1776. These are not
trick questions. I just want to see how many people say 1492. 1
get scared with my questions here. Now. Okay.
So in 1777 we declared ourselves the United States and we
had a congress who elected a president of the Articles of
Confederation and he ran the country. And his name? The
first president of the United States under the Articles of
Confederation was a man named John Hancock. However, it is
often stated that the first president of the United States was
John Hancock. Why John Hancock? Didn't he preside? presided
over the first continental congress when we declared our
independence and that is why his name appears so bold in the
Declaration of Independence and of course, we still say "sign
your John Hancock." But you've hear it anyway.
Washington then was not the first president despite what
your parents tell you and your preschool teachers. So why do we
call him the first president? He was the first president under
the new Constitution that we function under and he therefore
became president in April of 1789. Up until that time, there
were actually fifteen people who served as -- 12 different
people, but there were fourteen presidents before Washington.
Again, those nice little provisions of American history. The
real question is why don't we learn more about the Articles of
Confederation? But I think it is interesting how we -- little
in our books and we don't emphasize the fact that we don't have
a constitution and itself before George Washington and the
present constitution it was almost like a cover up. People
don't like commenting on the subtle mistake in our history.
Well I'm not sure it's a mistake. I think maybe it was. They
felt maybe some people feel it was, I don't know, I'm
not sure, but okay.
Well, countries also have either presidential system or
parliamentary system. What's ours? Presidential. Why? Because
we have a president. But there are many countries with
parliamentary that have presidents. Israel has a parliamentary
system with a president. They don't have a king or queen.
Usually we identify the system with England with the queen as
the figure head. What's the difference then between a
presidential system and a parliamentary system? The' basic
difference is that a presidential system the executive power
rests with the president. Okay. He is the real executor of the
law. He carries out the law. And is in of the legislature
In a parliamentary system who is really the chief executor?
Prime minister. Who is the representative of the parliament of
representative of the people usually many people feel that the
U.S. Is that they refuse to carry on the trial or better said
the conviction for impeachment because they didn't want to move
the United States toward a parliamentary system. It is very
common in parliamentary systems when a new majority comes in
that the chief executor is removed and their leader takes over.
And during a period of time when the -- an off-year election or
problems with the leader votes are taken which we refer to as no
confidence and during the vote the person is removed and a new
prime minister is brought in. In England, elections for
parliamentary held over five years however already often off
year elections and there are elections when a vote of no
confidence occurs and the United States has -A A separation of
power, if you will, between the executor and the legislative
branch. If the legislative branch were allowed continuously for
political reasons the president in the sense that it will
change the actual functioning of our constitution to what we
might refer to as a parliamentary system. So there was a lot of
thought in discussion in that although not in the press because
all the press was interested in was the scandal itself and the
impeachment, but this was a concern as to what this meant for
our constitutional system. Will there be a chance for the
president to even, you know, appeal the decision or anything?
Not on impeachment. If he had been convicted is it's just done,
over with, see ya. There's no appeal. Even if not, even to the
courts, no. That's a separation of powers between the
legislative, judicial, and executive branch. Whatever was done,
was done, is done, is done.
Any questions then on parliamentary versus presidential?
Who will probably be prime minister of the United States if we
had a prime minister system? A parliamentary temp, but the
position is that majority leader -- it's possible, I wouldn't
say you're wrong. It's possible. it's more likely that it will
be the Speaker of the House. Either of them are basically the
of the parliament if you are. The House and the Senate. Usually
we look to the House as the lower body which is where the prime
minister comes from anyway. It could be the majority leader of
senate or the speaker of the house.
Well, let me ask if there are any questions or
redefinitions before we move to democracy. Okay. Then um
we're going to move onto democracy, but we're going to do
that rather than get started today.