America's Ruling Class -- And The Perils Of Revolution
Please read this superb essay from The American Spectator.
You are not going to vote your way out of this predicament.
It will either be torn down, or eventually -- after untold cascades of pillage, rapine (both literal and figurative), and death -- it will collapse under its own contradictions.
But there is no electoral solution.
Both "sides" are, in fact, as one.
And you are not one of them.
posted by Concerned American | 4:52 AM
19 Comments:
Fabulous essay. It's only fitting that a Bostonian should write this.
Now, that puts the dot on the i and crosses the t.
Agreed. It's all going to crash. But no electoral solution? No, I don't accept that. I will vote for people that will work to rebuild it.
I don't accept your defeatist attitude. "...there is no electoral solution" and "...you are not one of them"
If we can't rebuild a constitutional republic, what is your alternative? Are you suggesting all is lost, and anarchy is the only answer?
No. Not while I'm still breathing. I will not abandon the Constitution in an attempt to save it. We already tried that in the past - that's why we're in the situation we find ourselves in - and I won't succumb to it.
That is a superb read that was worth every minute I spent.
I will continue to vote because it doesn't hurt, and it costs me nothing but a bit of time. Yet I have no illusions that the November elections will solve the problem. The many conservative and libertarians out there who betting it all on this next "roll of the dice" will hopefully have their eyes opened when those elections accomplish precisely dick!
WOW! How this got into print is amazing. Please pass this link onto all your friends. Make this go viral ASAP!
Chief Instructor:
That's what they want you to do and think.
Expand your possibility horizon.
Don't play their game.
If voting were to remove the plague of collectivists from us, why has it not worked yet? It is obvious that the situation continues to deteriorate, and accelerate at that.
As it is, voting works as a pacifier, an occupier of ones time, thought & effort - "just wait till November" is foolishness. The system is rigged for a preselected output, Tweedledee or Tweedledum.
With their control over the public indoctrination system, mass media and the executive/legislative/judicial branches, the financial system and more don't expect anything to change except the faces through voting.
Chief Instructor and those of like mind:
As noted elsewhere, we're not saying don't vote. Do vote your conscience, just don't count on it to be enough. You MUST have an effective Plan B.
A simple formula:
(1.) Do the "normal" voting and congress critter influencing things, just so they don't keep you from the efforts require for (2.) below
(2.) Prepare for a coming "unpleasantness" with the utmost seriousness, concern, and quality you can possible muster. Remember, power is not given up freely, it must be wrenched away from the abusers.
(3.) Recognize that you are a part of The Remnant and make sure you and others like you make it through to the other side, as we'll need such folks to rebuild the Constitutional Republic that we had prior to it being disfigured by current and prior abusers.
Don't know about The Remnant? For shame. Go here and read.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/nock3b.html
Reread every few months for your perspective - it does wonders.
Keep your powder dry,
Atlas Shrug
Political corruption is an old problem. Perhaps these veterans had the right idea..but we must keep more weopons and include more people. (the country class?) www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm
Voting. "Strange game. The only winning move is not to play." If you think you have the right to threaten your neighbor with violence in order to pay for things other people use, then by all means, vote. Because that's what voting is.
I agree - with the writer, our host (C.A.) and with our Chief Instructor.
Huh?
Yeah.
We *ARE* screwed.
There *IS* going to be a fight - though we should continue to do all within our power to prevent it while simultaneously preparing to wage and **WIN** it.
As to the Constitution, the fault is not with it. That Sacred Document is *THE* greatest example of G*d given wisdom in the history of humans' attempts to govern themselves.
We are where we are today - not because the Constitution failed us, but because ***WE*** failed to enforce our Constitution.
We have seen the enemy, and he is us.
DD
Dedicated_Dad, the Constitution is not a sacred document. It was written by men. They were smart men, perhaps wise men. But they were men. They were not inspired by God, and the Constitution was not given by God. God does not give anything that attempts to justify aggression against one's neighbor.
If we lived according to the words that God actually gave us, (the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule) it would completely pre-empt the Constitution, particularly because of the clauses, "Thou shalt not steal," "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's goods," "Thou shalt have no false gods [democracy is one of them] before me." And of course, "Thou shalt not murder."
Read 1 Samuel 8 to see what God really thinks about any coercively-funded government, as opposed to His rule over the hearts of men.
"We are where we are today - not because the Constitution failed us, but because ***WE*** failed to enforce our Constitution."
Great start, but don't stop thinking there! WHY and HOW did "we" fail the Constitution? And exactly what list of individual person's names is meant by "we"? Could it be that the Constitution's design assumes an overestimation of the willingness of the average individual to risk their individual blood and treasure fighting tyranny now, to gain an amorphous future public good of liberty? Does the Constitution already assume that men are collectivists? Does the design of the Constitution attempt to prove itself with a circular argument: first, assume men are collectivists; therefore, since men are collectivists, a collectivist governance design will work?
nuthatch: You may believe as you wish - for me there is simply no question that our Constitution was written by men under the inspiration of Divine Providence.
No question whatsoever.
The Samuel quote is nice, but then I'm sure you're aware that the rest of The Bible is also full of quotes telling slaves to be happy in their slavery, and subjects to accept the rule of despots -- even The Savior Himself uttered such platitudes.
That men will corrupt even the most blatant and obvious productions of G*d himself is self-evident - both scripture and history is full of more examples than could ever be enumerated.
That DOES NOT mean that the product is imperfect -- it merely proves that MEN are.
There are plenty of places on the planet which lack effective government - and life in those places is (to coin a phrase) "nasty, brutish and short." The strong abuse the weak, coalitions become gangs and warlords become dictators - just as they have from time immemorial.
For anarchy to ever work in a nation of any size would require excising all instinct to power from the human psyche -- when you figure out how to manage that I might be able to take the philosophy seriously. Until then, some government is a necessary evil, and you're engaging in magical-thinking.
Our Founders' Republic - as designed - was the best possible compromise -- a government which governed best by governing least.
Further, the sovereign and independent states which comprised the union were freed to further refine their governance as wished by their Citizens.
By design, they'd be forced to trend toward maximizing Liberty or risk having their citizens migrate to other states. Those who maximized Liberty would be rewarded with an influx of citizens, those inclining to tyranny would soon find they lack the population to finance their schemes.
But then, I'm sure you know all of this.
The simple fact is that - true to his nature - man has corrupted the plan to the point that it no longer exists in any recognizable form. This is an indictment of men, not of the plan.
Had We The People not somehow lost the courage and attention necessary to keep Leviathan within his due bounds, we would not be where we are today.
Evils are committed in the name of "government" - but the solution is not the abolition thereof.
The solution is a return to Our Founders' Republic - and an aware, sovereign citizenry to ensure it can never repeat its demonstrated propensity to evil.
God help us -- and God Save Our Republic!
DD
I'm aware of no quotes that tell men to be happy under slavery. I'm aware of one that says, "Slaves, be subject to your masters, not only to the gentle, but also to the froward." Does that say anything about being happy to be a slave? Slaves could, and did convert their masters by being humble and "subject" to them. By doing good to them, they "heaped coals of fire upon their heads." There is an entire epistle of St. Paul where he speaks of a runaway slave who helped him greatly. St. Paul told the "owner" to treat him as a brother, not as a servant. God meets his people where they are. What would have happened had Jesus said, "You must destroy this institution of slavery immediately?" It wouldn't have happened. But 1800 years later, the institution of slavery was abolished in every civilized country across the world, led primarily by the non-violent efforts of Christian abolitionists working according to Christian principles. Violence cannot change mens' minds. Jesus told his disciples that if their words were not received, they were not to "call down fire from heaven," but rather, they were to shake the dust from their feet and move on.
St. Paul also speaks of being subject to "whatever powers might be." (The original Greek text was in the subjunctive.) He then equates the powers that be with a prince, who he says is someone that "does not bear the sword in vain," and who "is not a terror to the good, but only to the wicked." If you see someone who does bear the sword in vain, or who harms innocent people, he's probably not the kind of person St. Paul was speaking of. Again, direct violence against an entrenched regime which still has popular support, "resisting the power" would cause more violence than it prevented. If it did not actually achieve liberation, it would be violence for the sake of violence. When the majority of men are virtuous, wicked regimes topple without a shot being fired. Did St. Paul mean to say that Moses himself, who "resisted" Pharaoh, (but not through violent means) was wrong to have done so? Do you really believe that it was wrong for Rosa Parks to refuse to get up from her seat?
Next, are you speaking of Jesus' statement "Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's?" A little earlier in that discussion, Jesus asked for the coin of tribute. Right there in the temple area, a Jew took out a coin with a graven image of a man (prohibited to the Jews) and showed it to him. He asked, "Whose are the image and the inscription?" They answered, "Caesar's." Does that mean that the coin belongs to Caesar? It does not. Does that mean that Caesar gets whatever he wants? It does not. The passage begs the question: what belongs to God??
"For anarchy to ever work in a nation of any size would require excising all instinct to power from the human psyche"
For anarchy to work, taxation must be made militarily impractical. The Libertarian minority must be able to defend itself militarily against the Socialist majority. That's all that's required. Maybe you can help by inventing a new gun, a new camera, a new bank which by its technical nature helps the individual resist the mob which wants to rob him.
"Our Founders' Republic - as designed - was the best possible compromise -- a government which governed best by governing least."
Our Founders' Republic - as designed - was a vast power grab and a bloodless coup over the Articles of Confederation that was currently in power. The sales pitch by Hamilton for replacing the Articles with the Constitution was that it would create a more energetic government. The Constitution was not designed to govern least, it was designed to govern more than the Articles.
"The simple fact is that - true to his nature - man has corrupted the plan to the point that it no longer exists in any recognizable form. This is an indictment of men, not of the plan."
Man is the same now as he was then. If the plan required something of man that man was unlikely to supply, then the plan sucked. The Alien and Sedition Act occurred only about ten years after ratification, so the Constitution failed very early on.
God, I've been sayin' this. No vote in November is going to fix this. Christ, they are still putting Reid in the lead in Nevada. What is wrong with these people?!? You've got Russ Feingold telling anyone who will listen that he is a staunch supporter of the 2nd Amendment and deserves a vote. Would you give me a break. and would someone please tell me why McCain is still a viable candidate?!?
People, Speak out! Shout! Write! Use all caps if you have to! Do something. Anything. Find a bumpersticker you like and use it. If you can't find one. Make one. Print it out and put it in your cars window.
ARRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!
Go ahead and vote. Watch as in the following months after the election, the policies put in place by obysmal are kept in place or maybe, like the bank finance bill, some will be axed as a show. But totally ineffective, a joke. On you.
Foolish children, open your eyes. Haven't any of you been paying attention?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home