Tag: consent of the goverened

If At First You Don’t Secede …

So we did it once, secession that is, but the next time did not go so well for those who just wanted to live life THEIR way .. of course that time “slavery” was the excuse for not letting those 7 states go, EVEN THOUGH the Union slave states kept their slaves in bondage until the end of the war against southern independence.

Once the war was won by the Union and the Radical Republicans, the military districts set up ensured Reconstruction punished those who believed in the “consent of the governed” to put that ideal to rest and believe in “one nation indivisible”. It didn’t take, even after 100 years of economic hardship in the South, there is still injustice in the air.

Fast forward to 2021 and what have we learned? That a vast majority of Americans prefer safety to freedom. There is a lot of learning (and un-learning) to do in the years to come.

Tom Woods clarifies how wrong the state-educated Americans get the first secession of the thirteen colonies from the British Empire:

In school, we were told this: “No taxation without representation.”

Zzzzzzzz.

The real principles were more like the following.

(1) No legislation without representation.

The colonists insisted that they could be governed only by the colonial legislatures. This is the principle of self-government.

This is why a Supreme Court ordering localities around is anti-American in the truest sense. It operates according to the opposite principle from the one the American colonists stood for.

(2) Contrary to the modern Western view of the state that it must be considered one and indivisible, the colonists believed that a smaller unit may withdraw from a larger one. Today we are supposed to consider this unthinkable.

(3) The colonists’ view of the (unwritten) British constitution was that Parliament could legislate only in those areas that had traditionally been within the purview of the British government. Customary practice was the test of constitutionality. The Parliament’s view, on the other hand, was in effect that the will and act of Parliament sufficed to make its measures constitutional.

So the colonists insisted on strict construction, if you will, while the British held to more of a “living, breathing” view of the Constitution. Sound familiar?

I think these are key .. because we all know the taxes AFTER the war for independence were higher than before the war (thank you George Washington and Alexander Hamilton). NO legislation without REAL representation .. and I don’t just mean voting!

.. and this whole Pledge of Allegiance propaganda that implies one nation, indivisible .. well that could only have been written by a socialist (here is looking at you Francis Bellamy). Only empires, communist states and democracies want the largest territories to be able to tax the people from, as when you run out of other people’s money, well then that is the end of that road.

As far as Tom’s point #3, well I align more with Lysander Spooner:

I don’t care how limited you make a constitution, at the end of the day it is still a piece of paper.

Now beyond this I call attention to Peter R. Quinones’ latest:

… What did affect me was watching people just roll over and take everything that not only the State was doing to them when it came to COVID-hysteria, but how people also backed down from neighbors who turned into COVID-Karens and COVID-Kyles. THAT made me re-think just about everything.

Up until then I thought there was a chance that in my lifetime 5-8% of people would get on board with drastically reducing the size and reach of the federal government. Now, I no longer believe that’s possible… using the same tactics as before. Society has proven that it wants to be told what to do when it comes to pretty much every single action in their lives. And libertarians are the people “diligently plotting to take over the world and leave you alone.” Barf!

I’ve come to realize that any message about increases in individual liberty and contractions to government must be accompanied by an equally powerful message of personal responsibility. Does anyone reading this believe that the majority of the population wants to take responsibility for their lives? I don’t. Then maybe this message of personal liberty and responsibility needs be accompanied with a detailed plan on how to achieve that. I know, I know, we don’t tell people how to live their lives. However, if you don’t educate them someone else will, and that someone else will most likely be the State. Do you trust the State to actually help people with this goal? ..

I don’t trust the state, no way, no how.

After the past 16 months, if you still do, I recommend you get some counseling!

So the path forward  includes the hard work of showing how keeping people on the government handouts is a recipe for life long servitude. It should not be a surprise how the 1960s Great Society blew up the black culture in the US .. how many black families have fathers in the home today? Not as many as they did in the 1950s.

Well, it is apparent this last go around that the US government wants even more dependent people sucked in to the state’s freedom prison. Do know that boxcars are at the end of every one of these utopian totalitarianism wet dreams. People need to understand this with their head and THEN believe it with their hearts.

I am sorry to say that churches don’t even give hope in this present trajectory, just like the 1st century Pharisees and Sadducees gave no real hope to the people, just more of the same as they allied with the state at every turn.

Grassroots one person at a time, keeping any groups very small and be on the lookout for infiltration from the state .. you can never be too careful with your circle of “friends”.

May this 4th of July inspire you toward the next real secession event here in the USA.

-SF1

Choices? You Ain’t Got No Stinkin’ Political Choices .. Socialism or Nationalism

There was a time when “consent of the governed” meant something:

That to secure these [God-given] rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government ..

Even Abraham Lincoln, in a moment of clarity (i.e. when he and his Illinois could BENEFIT from something other than a government about to go to war with Mexico for Texas) said:

Quote from 1846, NOT from 1861.

By 1861, with Lincoln wanting those seven states that had left under Buchanan’s watch BACK in the UNION for REVENUE, he changed his mind.

Now think on that a bit. If you reflect on a marriage where one spouse not only takes most of your money, but also abuses you verbally, you have every right to seek a just divorce. So too did these seven southern states.

Post 2020 election, if President Trump loses, those “deplorables” who have been ripped off by democracy morphing into socialism, which Karl Marx said was only a stage before communism (REIMAGINE THIS), are once again going to think about this “consent”. Most deplorables are ardent nationalists that would still invade states that attempt to leave the union.

Secession is THE answer, whether it be the fly-over country or the east and Left coasts, it be time for a divorce!

To be honest, the deplorables will not only have to look at the evil Democratic political party, but also the stupid GOP political party that did nothing to stop the spread of socialism (Bush’s “No Child Left Behind”, Corporate Welfare State, etc).  The GOP is secretly in bed with the Democrats and predictably vote in lockstep on the major shifts in this once federated republic:

  • The Patriot Act
  • The Invasion of Iraq
  • Obamacare (and keeping it even when the GOP had control of Prez / Congress)
  • Illegal Immoral Wars and Interventions: Ukraine, Syria, Libya

So just to be clear, our US political choices include plan 1.1 and plan 1.2, because they are only a little different (tough to see that these are radically different, as both cause more deaths and keeps removing our God-given freedoms):

The Deadly Isms | S2 Ep 1: Socialism

AND

The Deadly Isms | S2 Ep 2: Nationalism

It is time to learn the differences, but more importantly, to understand what is not talked about in political circles, that of freedom, individuality, consent of the governed and being left alone!

If Trump is re-elected, you will have a little more time to come up to speed on how politics or voting will never fix this. The “Great Reset” is here, so it will be time to:

Empires and collectives will never want freedom as they promise you various utopias. Get smart, recognize a PsyOp, and blend into the woodwork locally while connecting with like minded-people for the road ahead.

Peace out.

-SF1

If Lincoln is Considered a “Conservative” … What Does That Mean?

When I first started reading World Book Encyclopedias as a boy, I am sure I ran across terms like liberal and conservatives. I am not sure they were thrown about like they are today to attempt to place people in two different and opposing camps,but I know these words were used.

In terms of philosophy of any kind, words matter. One needs to know the definition of the day is seems. So when one reads historical books, newspapers and journals, context matters. Back in 1800, liberal thought is very far away from today’s liberal thought, it seems. The same can be said of the word conservative.

Looking at the root of that word I would contend that it means to “conserve” or even “preserve” something. Obviously, one can be extreme in these things as one can attempt to preserve everything from a previous generation, however, most intelligent beings see things of value that their ancestors did that makes life better for any people group that desires to get along, be allowed to bring their own unique value to society and to freely trade and barter in a free market so wealth is created 360 to again allow society to thrive.

This article in Beliefnet does touch on the attempts of modern day conservatives (only in name) to disrespect anyone who dares to trample on the ‘conservative’ nature of their hero, their god, Abraham Lincoln. I would like to use a few clips toward generating some thought around this important topic, because again, words matter and our thinking through these things help us to sort through the wasteland of people’s beliefs these days and identify what is true and honorable enough to preserve for future generations.

“The debate over Lincoln on the Right is so important,” Lowry writes, “because it can be seen, in part, as a proxy for the larger argument over whether conservatism should read itself out of the American mainstream or—in this hour of its discontent—dedicate itself to a Lincolnian program of opportunity and uplift consistent with its limited-government principles.” – Rich Lowry, editor of National Review

Ok then, I almost threw up in my throat when I read Lincoln in the same sentence as “limited” government but I will share what the author of this article, Jack Kerwick, has to say:

Now, being neither a Lincoln scholar nor even an historian, I am neither a “hater” nor a deifier of Lincoln. I am, however, a philosopher, a political philosopher, and a conservative political philosopher to boot. As such, I confess to being at a loss to account for how any self-avowed conservative, any proponent of “limited government,” could look to, of all people, Abraham Lincoln as a source of inspiration.

Ok, Jack and I are indeed tracking. It continues to amaze me that with Lincoln’s true record of achievements that “limited government” would be considered something that he believed in. Well, since we know the typical character of politicians, maybe at one time Abe believed in “limited” government:

Of course that was in 1848 around the time of the Mexican War which he was against, so you will have that. However by 1860/1861 he no longer believed that because then he would have let the seven southern states leave in peace, right?

Back to what Jeff has to say:

Lincoln presided over America during what remains, by leaps and bounds, its darkest hour. More tellingly, he was, at the very least, instrumental in making it its darkest hour, for Lincoln waged a war unprecedented (in our history) for its death and destruction, and he waged it against Americans. Whether or not he had the constitutional right to do so, whether or not the South was the aggressor, are utterly irrelevant considerations.

To repeat, for our purposes here, Lincoln’s legal and moral prerogatives or lack thereof simply do not matter. What matters is that for four long years, the President of the United States conducted the bloodiest war that, before or since, our nation had ever witnessed, a war that laid waste to much of the country, to say nothing of the genuinely federal character of the government that the Framers of the Constitution ratified.

Exactly, for if “Limited-Gov Abe” was really all that he was claimed to be, his split personality took over in 1861 when he was inaugurated in early March. Lincoln refused to meet southern peace commissioners, refused to meet with Napoleon II and delayed calling Congress to meet until JULY 1861 after preparing for war was well underway.

The point is that whatever else may be said of Lincoln, it is difficult to see how, with Lowry, we can say of him that he was “perhaps the foremost proponent of opportunity in all of American history,” “the paladin of individual initiative, the worshipper of the Founding Fathers, and the advocate of self-control ..”

Seriously?

However, when you think about it, if you want to redefine “conservative” you can use a legend whose qualities match your own and call it all good:

But maybe that’s the point. Maybe today’s “conservatives” do need Lincoln, for given their obsession with fundamentally transforming the Islamic world into a bastion of Democracy and their own country into the melting pot of the universe, today’s conservatives care as much about preserving the decentralized character of American government as did Lincoln.

As a result, they are about as conservative as him as well.

Can I get a “bingo”?

-SF1