Monthly Archives: July 2013

Romantic Nationalism

Americans are romantics at heart.  They are imbued or dominated by idealism.  They are infatuated with glamour, the latest trend, and the newest rock star personality.  Perhaps a movie star or a sports figure, a hip-hop artist or the latest casual-chic fashions, or the next savior that has ventured on to the political stage. 

A country divided along cultural, spiritual, and political lines has created an aura of animosity fueled by media and political vitriol aimed directly at their enemies.  We the people are the enemies.  The half in power wants to marginalize if not eradicate their enemies.  The rallying cry for the other half is “Take Back America”.   It has devolved into an epic struggle over power.  The power to rule and exercise dominion over others is to subjugate fellow human beings under a single unitary view.  A view you may or may not agree with.  Make no mistake; a large swath of people will be subjugated if this course is pursued to its logical end.

What the mob wants the mob will get.  The mob will get it through their romantic attachment to the latest and greatest politician.  Obama is our savior.  Vote for Romney because he’s not Obama.  The cult-a-personality infatuation with people has resulted in romantic nationalism.

Inherent in peoples’ romantic obsession with nationalism is the complete destruction of individual rights, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Nationalism is collectivism clothed in red, white, and blue overtures.  The nation, the country, is placed upon a pedestal that towers over everyone and everything.  As the people rally around a flag, a pledge, an anthem, or rally around this candidate or that candidate, they lose sight of simple truths.  They cannot see the forest through the trees.

The Union was not founded in nationalism; rather it was founded upon certain transcendent and fundamental principles.  Indeed, some degree of nationalism was present even during the founding generation; however the cementing of nationalism started with the Hamiltonian types (Hamilton, Wilson, Marshall) and was accelerated by Lincoln.  Over the decades other such as Wilson, Roosevelt, and Johnson (to name a few) reinforced the idea of nationalism through government intervention in all economic and personal activities. 

An interventionist foreign policy under Wilson, and propagated since then by most presidents, has transmuted the Union into an “international democracy force” under some moral imperative that all people around the world deserve to live like Americans whether they want it or not.  And, America is going to give it to them good and hard.  Lincoln’s obsession with preserving the Union gave birth to the notion that the government knows what’s best for the people, and by compulsion or force the government will subjugate you according to their judgment.  Lincoln’s obsession birthed a “might makes right” mentality.  The victim – besides the 650,000 killed – was consent of the governed.  The right of self-determination was given a swift burial under Lincoln’s mighty sword.

The rebar for these political agendas is none other than the Supreme Court.  The so-called “protector” of the Constitution acts as the enabler to those that wish to further consolidate and concentrate power into the hands of a few hundred people.  Once again, the people are enamored by and revere the nine members of the Supreme Court as though they are oracles.  Once again the people are cast under the spell of these nine sagacious, impartial, and just politically connected lawyers that have a vested interest in retaining power.   Thus, the romance continues as the people subjugate themselves to the personal policy preferences and penumbras of other people.  The people sacrifice their freedom and liberty upon the nationalist altar of superiority while being consumed by the latest casual-chic fashion or latest reality show.  

These rallying calls to “take back America” or “we’ll through the bums out next election”, or “restore America’s mission” miss the point.  Federalism and republicanism are the answers.  But, those on both sides of the political aisle are romantically attached to the idea of nationalism.

Federalism and republicanism are superior because they embrace consent of the governed – the right of self-determination and self-governance.  They are superior because the people, in smallish communities determine the laws they live under.  They are superior because individual rights are secured and protected rather than decided on by one person on the Supreme Court.  They are superior because they decentralize power.  They are superior as hundreds or thousands of states offer choices to individuals instead of living under a unitary, monolithic government. They are superior because it is the only system where self-directed and autonomous people can live without the daily grind of coercive and intrusive government.

The romance with nationalism is fatal.  It’s not unlike a relationship with two people.  Any relationship has but two possible outcomes; it eventually ends or someone dies (think about it). The Union will either end or a lot of people will die to ensure its survival.  The Union will end if the people can exercise their right of self-determination, secede, and re-form their political societies.  Or, just as Lincoln ensured 650,000 people died, there may be a time when the government kills millions more to the detriment of the “consent of the governed”. 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Time Has Come

The fundamental premise that the federal government is one of enumerated and limited powers where the legislature makes laws, the executive executes the laws, and the judiciary hears cases and controversies is dead.  It’s gone.  It’s a distant memory hidden away in the recesses of a few craniums, occasionally making faint appearances in mans’ consciousness.  The Rule of Law has been eviscerated; jettisoned from the minds of all Americans and supplanted with the Rule of Man.

If, like me, you understand the principles so eloquently stated in the Declaration of Independence you should be outraged at the despicable, immoral, and ignoble acts of government.   If, like me, you understand the Constitution established by the voluntary acts of the people of the thirteen free and independent states birthed a Union of limited, enumerated powers you should be horrified by the complete and total annihilation of our political societies.

Words have meaning and in our governing documents those words have a fixed meaning.  Without a fixed meaning and understanding it’s nonsensical to believe a government could operate in a stable, consistent manner.  Government operates without constraint.  Government operates with impunity and utter disregard to the Rule of Law.  Five hundred and forty five people rule over three hundred and ten million people.  Frankly, this is often times reduced to one person ruling over everyone else.

Contrast a common crime like a person stealing $1,000 of merchandise from a Walmart and being tried.  To convict them it takes 12 people reaching a unanimous decision.  Now, imagine that your right to property, to keep and bear arms, etc. is in question and reaches the Supreme Court.  In a 5-4 decision, 1 person – YES 1 PERSON – can take anything from you.  There is absolutely no limit to what the miscreants in government and especially the Supreme Court can and will do to you.

The judiciary has enabled the destruction of the Constitution by operating within a sphere of power never delegated to it under the Constitution.  Judicial policy preferences and penumbras have superseded the very idea of consent of the governed.   Constitutional law has absolutely nothing to do with the constitution.  The basic principle of consent of the governed is the people make the laws that they live under.  Those laws may not always be wise, good, or moral.  One lawyer was never empowered to override the consent of the governed even when those laws may not comport with their personal preference, dictums, penumbras, or any other belief.

The judiciary is nothing less than what Raoul Berger describes in his book, Government by Judiciary, as a continuous constitutional convention.  Judges act as though they speak for the people by revising, amending, and twisting the constitution to mean anything they desire.  Typically, those desires reflect the judges’ personal preferences over the Constitution and the people themselves.  Consent of the governed is but a distant memory as judges issue opinions overriding the majority will of the governed.  These opinions are viewed as authoritative and binding on the people even when the opinions contradict the consent of the governed.  It is farcical and absurd to consider the political right to vote as the only means to exercise your consent as the governed.  Consent of the governed encompasses much more than the mere casting of a ballot every two or four years.

The executive is empowered to execute laws.  The executive has an opportunity to veto any law he believes violates the constitution.  However, once enacted the executive is bound by his duty to execute the law.  If the executive dismisses his duty is he not in violation of his oath of office?  For instance, if the executive unilaterally decides to not implement part of the Affordable Care Act is that not a nullification of that part of the Act?  Likewise, the Defense of Marriage Act was not enforced by the current executive.  Is that not an act of nullification?  Likewise, border security is not enforced.  Is that not an act of nullification?

The executive, as our agent and fiduciary, has nullified duly enacted laws.  As an agent of the people of the states he has no authority to nullify any law he disagrees with.  In fact, he swore an oath to faithfully execute the laws.

The Congress is the branch delegated the power to make laws.  The executive and the judiciary have no law-making powers under the Constitution.   No branch of government has any power delegated to amend, revise, rescind, or alter the constitution or the meaning of the constitution.  Only a properly ratified amendment can change the constitution.  But, Congress has far exceeded the powers delegated under Article I Section 8 of the constitution.  The executive has exceeded powers delegated in Article 2.  The judiciary has exceeded powers delegated in Article 3 by operating in a continuous constitutional convention revising, amending, and re-writing the Constitution according to their own personal preferences.

All three branches operate without any limitations on power.  Instead of a government of enumerated and limited powers we have a government without limits exercising all power over the people.  The Congress, the executive, and the judiciary act in concert with one another to destroy the fabric of the Union.  Torn down and apart by decades of usurpations the government has metastasized like a malignant tumor destroying the component parts that give life.  The tumor has consumed the very ideals of consent of the governed and the right of self-determination.  Federalism has been obliterated.

The people stand exposed and naked against the brute force of arbitrary and capricious acts of the ruling class.

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

The time has come to end the foolish belief the ruling class will neuter its own power.   The time has come to exercise our right to self-determination and self-governance by throwing off the very Government that reduces us to absolute Despotism.  The time has come for the consent of the governed to withdraw their consent as it is our Right and our Duty to provide new Guards for our future security.

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized