Original Freedoms of Intent

Do you see yourself as more Republican or leaning more Democrat? Oh my, I'm a card-carrying Republican. Came from a long patriarchal line of red-blooded Republicans. What makes you a Republican? What is Republicanism, do you think? Well...being against the Democrats, mostly. OK. I get that. But, what are Republicans for that Democrats are at least not in favor of enough to give it sufficient priority for you to feel economically and politically comfortable? Republicans are Freedom Fighters. Give us liberty or death. Well, presumably we will all have both, eventually, but liberty for what, freedom to what, freedom from what? Free markets and freedom of religious expression and free from terrorist and socialist threats, to begin with; freedoms protected by our Constitution including its Amendments, Bill of Rights. And presumably Democrats are, then, for enslaved by regulation markets, prescribed and proscribed absence of religious expression, because they are all secret atheists anyway, and more willing to accept terrorism and socialism as part of Earth's sick political and economic bounty, and are, at best, ambivalent about freedoms and values asserted by Constitutional authorities, including amendments, defined by their Original Historical-Cultural Intent. That sounds about right. Would you agree that the Preamble and the somewhat older Declaration of Independence bear seminal weight for establishing the Constitution's intent with regard to protection and promotion of freedoms? Maybe. Democratic freedoms during our pre- through post-revolutionary period, were originally defined by contrast against a backdrop of economic and political plutocracy. Our interdependent constitution as a free nation composed of States with their own democratically intending constitutions were statements that we would not be owned nor tyrannically controlled, taxed and terminated, by royalty. Freedom from plutocratic authorities lies within our U.S. Constitution's definition as a free union of democracies, to live in interdependent cooperative freedoms in which political authority's boundaries no longer exceed responsive economic co-invested co-responsibilities. Which party would you argue is more articulate about sustaining freedoms from plutocratic centralizing power trends and systems and ecopolitical outcomes of jingoistic nationalism that disguises triumphalism of the rich and powerful becoming ever more rich and powerful? Well, I'm not sure. That would probably be the Greens or the Libertarians. And, which party is more self-defined as supporting regenerative interdependent responsibilities to sustain future generations of balanced democratic freedoms from pathological plutocratic authorities and yet growing freedoms to become responsibly, nutritionally, co-responsible nurturers and health-mentors of and for Earth's future cooperatively renewing and self-regenerating Commons? That would be the Greens as polypathic PermaCulturists. So, why aren't you that, instead of the card-carrying Republican? Oh, that's your easiest question yet: Because nobody votes for the Greens, and hardly anybody has even heard, much less smelled or seen, a cooperatively networking PermaCulturist. Unless you count trees and plants and ecosystems. But we don't. They can't vote. Or do they?