Ya’ll Should Be Ashamed Of Yourselves

Have you ever been called in for jury duty? Have you ever made it past the selection process and sat on a jury? Jury duty is one of the things on my bucket list; things I’d like to do before I die. I’ve been called in many times; even made it up to the jury box once and was asked a few questions before being thanked for my time and dismissed; but I’ve yet to get the chance to sit on a jury during a trial.

Why do I begin this asking about jury duty? Well trial by jury is one of the rights protected by Constitutional Amendment; the Sixth Amendment in fact. A juror is expected to be able to sit through a trial, hearing both sides argue their case, and then come to a verdict based upon examination of the facts. Jurors are expected to have a modicum of common sense and critical thinking skill.

Can justice be served when the majority of the people in this country bow down in submission to laws which violate the Constitution and infringe upon their liberty? Can justice be served in this country when most people couldn’t explain the difference between a democracy and a republic, or the difference between an oligarchy and a theocracy?

I would feel pretty comfortable making the statement that close to 80% of the people in this country believes that our system of government is a democracy. The number is probably closer to 90%, but I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt on that.

Had you taken the time to read both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution you might have noticed that the word democracy is nowhere to be found in either. Could that have been an oversight on the part of our Founders? I think not; I think it was intentional; and I can prove it.

Our Founders despised democracy. A few quotes from some more familiar of our Founders ought to be sufficient to prove that they would NOT have established a democracy in America.

-Democracy is the most vile form of government. ~James Madison~

-We are a Republic. Real Liberty is never found in despotism or in the extremes of Democracy. ~Alexander Hamilton~

-Democracy will soon degenerate into an anarchy; such an anarchy that every man will do what is right in his own eyes and no man’s life or property or reputation or liberty will be secure, and every one of these will soon mould itself into a system of subordination of all the moral virtues and intellectual abilities, all the powers of wealth, beauty, wit, and science, to the wanton pleasures, the capricious will, and the execrable [abominable] cruelty of one or a very few. ~John Adams~

-Democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine percent. ~Thomas Jefferson~

Writing on the inevitable outcome of democratic societies, Alexis de Tocqueville states, “Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks, on the contrary, to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness; it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances: what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living? ”

That sounds strikingly similar to the government we have today, doesn’t it? There is something missing in de Tocqueville’s comments though; individuality and freewill. Also missing is any mention of individual responsibility.

I have seen firsthand how most people, the moment they encounter any difficulty whatsoever, they seek assistance from someone else; typically someone in a position of authority. Gone is the belief that your survival, your sustenance, your defense are your responsibilities, and yours alone. These concepts of self-reliance have been replaced by the nonsense that it is societies, or government’s responsibility to provide for all our needs.

This current mindset destroys liberty and makes slaves of men. Freedom of choice and the corresponding responsibility of accepting the consequences of those choices are what make men free. As a free man, or woman, nobody should be held accountable for the actions of anyone else, or be shouldered with the responsibility of providing for them the things they need to survive. How can one truly consider themselves free when such burdens are placed upon them?

Yet society today is full of people who’ve been indoctrinated into believing that it is, in fact, the responsibility of society, or that of government, to provide all these things for us. What has become of us when we willingly surrender our freedom because of the promise of safety and security all these governmental programs and laws provide?

Can you imagine a political candidate publicly stating something like “If an American is to amount to anything he must rely upon himself, and not upon the State; he must take pride in his own work, instead of sitting idle to envy the luck of others. He must face life with resolute courage, win victory if he can, and accept defeat if he must, without seeking to place on his fellow man a responsibility which is not theirs.”? Yet that is exactly what Theodore Roosevelt, a former president of these States united once said.

All that is wrong with this country today, from the laws which violate our rights to the massive debt our government has incurred, can be traced back to one simple fact; people have forgotten for what purpose their government was established.

Government is a lawmaking body, and the laws it passes are supreme and must be obeyed by all. But there is a qualifying statement that many people tend to ignore; that all laws passed by government MUST BE in pursuance of the specific powers granted government by the Constitution. This fact is hidden away in Article 6, Clause 2, wherein it says, “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof….shall be the supreme Law of the Land…”

Therefore, if all laws passed in pursuance of the specific powers granted government are binding upon us all, then the reverse is also true; that all laws passed which are not in pursuance of those specific powers are null and void AND NOT binding upon us.

This statement, while sounding almost revolutionary and subversive, is founded in legal doctrine. The Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, states, “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey and unconstitutional law, and no courts are bound to enforce it.”

If I were to ask you what the purpose of law was, how would you answer? And don’t give me that nonsense about preventing crime; I want you to dig deeper and do some serious thinking on this; what is the purpose for which laws are enacted? To take it one step further, what is the purpose for government?

Among the reasons the preamble to our Constitution declares that our government was established to establish justice and secure the blessings of liberty. So any, and all, laws passed by this government must have these things as justification for their being passed. If any law acts in opposition to these ends then they are unconstitutional.

The Frenchman Frederic Bastiat writes the following about law, “What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right—from God—to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

If every person has the right to defend—even by force—his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right—its reason for existing, its lawfulness—is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force—for the same reason—cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.”

Our government, often at the behest of the people it represents, has sought to destroy our liberty. It has also enacted laws which take away the property of the people in the form of taxes which are then used to fund programs that redistribute this stolen money to others who are in need.

But there is more to property than simply money or possessions; much more. In 1792 James Madison wrote a little ditty about property in which he said, “This term in its particular application means “that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual.”

In its larger and juster meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.

In the former sense, a man’s land, or merchandize, or money is called his property.

In the latter sense, a man has a property in his opinions and the free communication of them.

He has a property of peculiar value in his religious opinions, and in the profession and practice dictated by them.

He has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person.

He has an equal property in the free use of his faculties and free choice of the objects on which to employ them.

In a word, as a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.”

Read that last sentence as many times as you must for it to sink in. I read it probably hundreds of times before the light bulb went on in my head and I finally got what he was saying. It means that I, as well as every other individual, have a right to property; that it is something no one can take from them. It also means that my/our rights are part of that property, and therefore no one can take them from us either.

While the American people bicker over whether Trump or Hillary will become the next president our government continues to grow into this bloated pig that deprives us of both our property and our liberty. Does it matter whose driving the bus when the bus finally drives off the edge of a cliff?

Our Founders did not establish a democracy, they established a Republic in which government was supreme, but only in regards to the specific powers granted it. In all else the powers were reserved to the States or the people. See the 10th Amendment if you don’t believe that statement.

Do you know what an oligarchy is? Let me try to help you understand. In the movie The Patriot Mel Gibson stands up and defends his loyalist position by saying, “Why would you trade 1 tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants less than 1 mile away?” The quote is based upon comments made by Mather Byles, a clergyman in Boston prior to the American Revolution.

The fundamental point of that quote is that tyranny is tyranny and it does not matter if it is administered by a single individual or a group of them. Would it matter to you if a single dictator ruled over you, or if a Soviet style Politburo ran the country with an iron fist? I think not; as the end result of a total loss of freedom would be the same.

What we have no is not a Republic, but an oligarchy in which we still retain very limited freedom. Most of what we do is regulated by some form of governmental restrictions and our rights have been severely restricted. It is almost feudalistic in nature with government, Lords, ruling over us while we work the land and pay tribute, (taxes) to them for the privilege of working. If we become too outspoken or refuse to pay our taxes then they come after us with their minions, (ATF, FBI, IRS, DEA, and all the other agencies established to keep us in line.)

Have you ever even stopped to consider that where it not for the Constitution our government would not even exist? How could any agency which was created by the people, or the States, become more powerful than those who created it?

Under Republicanism, the fact that we are a Republic not a democracy, the people are the ultimate sovereigns over their servant, the government. Isn’t it about time we grew a pair of balls and started acting like sovereigns? Or is the price of freedom to high and you would rather sit back and enjoy the comfort and security of servitude?

Two quotes from the Adams cousins, John and Samuel, ought to be sufficient to describe my feelings towards the average Grazer who enjoys the liberty this country has to offer but is unwilling to fight to preserve it.

The first quote comes from the former president of these States united, John Adams, “Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.”

The second comes from Samuel Adams and states, “If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you: May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

If you really were an American and considered yourself a free man/woman, and I mean down to the core principles you believed in, you would not sit back and tolerate a single second more of this government’s violation of the limits the Constitution imposes upon its power, or its continued assault upon your liberty.

The simple truth is that freedom is not free; it takes work and dedication to certain principles to preserve and protect it. I guess too many people are more than willing to live in servitude than do what needs done to restore liberty to America.

Ya’ll should be ashamed of yourselves.

Neal Ross
Writing in obscurity behind enemy
lines in the Socialist State of California

24 June 2016
Anno Domini

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.