If someone wanted to take over a country without ever firing a shot, how do you imagine they would go about doing it; that is if it were even possible? Actually it would be easier than one thinks if the person or people attempting to take over a country had two things; patience and control over what our children are taught.
Although there may be some innate desire to be free in each of us, the basic principles upon which our system of government was built must be taught to us; either by our parents or our educators. If one could gain control of the curriculum being taught our students they would have the ability to shape the opinions and beliefs of entire generations of a society, or as Lenin once said, “Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.”
Is it any wonder that in any discussion of American politics today, especially when conducting these discussions with younger generations, one gets the impression that they believe their feelings are of greater value than facts? There simply is no arguing with people when they refuse to accept facts, or have no facts to back up their positions; relying totally on feelings. How can one expect to have any kind of honest debate when one side refuses to accept facts? It is like a football game in which the rules of play only apply to one team; those playing by the rules cannot win under circumstances like that; nor can one win a political debate when the other side refuses to accept facts.
The basic principles upon which America was founded are not that difficult to understand if you would just think about them. The problem lies in the fact that once a person’s core beliefs have been established it is very difficult to change them; no matter the preponderance of evidence which proves their beliefs to be invalid. It is a sad truth that people would much rather go on believing lies than they would changing their belief system; especially if in changing their belief system means they are forced to accept unwanted hardship or responsibility.
So basically, if someone wanted to take control of a country, all they would have to do is to deprive the youth of the history of their country and the principles upon which it was established. If you could do this, replace truth with feel good emotions, then it becomes much easier to manipulate the opinions of entire segments of society; as people will no longer stand for principles, they will stand for issues.
Once this has been accomplished the next logical step is to tell them that the purpose of government is to do things about these issues, and the Constitutional limitations upon government and the defense of people’s rights be damned! The battle cry then becomes that the ends justify the means; even if the means mean that some people’s rights are violated.
Once these things have been accomplished, what Dresden James once said will become the norm, ” When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.”
THE FACT IS that our Founders believed that all men are born with certain unalienable rights that no one, not another man nor a system of government can lawfully deprive them of. Some of these rights we are all familiar with; the freedom of speech; protest; religion; and the right to keep and bear arms being but a few. Then of course there are the rights as outlined in the Declaration of Independence; the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
But then there are lesser known rights, such as the right to property. Property is not simply things which you buy with the money you earn; it also includes all the things to which you alone can lay claim to; such as your thoughts and your beliefs. When anyone, be it a group of people or a government, begins telling people what they can think, what they can say, they are violating the right of property; especially when in so doing they are protecting the right of another group to openly express their beliefs while at the same time restricting your right to do the same.
THE FACT IS that our Founders based their beliefs on the purpose of government upon the thinking of men like John Locke, who in his Second Treatise explained that in a State of Nature the rights of the individual are not certain; prone to attack by others. Locke explains that the purpose of both civil and political societies is to better secure the rights of the individual. This is the building block upon which our nation was built, and found within the Declaration of Independence, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed…”
THE FACT IS that our government exists ONLY because the true sovereigns of this country, the people, created it. Government did not will itself into existence; it was created when a group of men gathered together and debated over what shape it should take and what powers it should have. These ideas where then given life by the consent of the people through the ratification process by which each State debated the question of whether to adopt or reject this plan for government.
THE FACT IS that our government is not one with unlimited authority to act on behalf of the people. In fact, the laws it was to pass was not supposed to directly affect the lives of the people who make up the American Republic. You see, the people already had State governments for that purpose, to govern over the lives of the people within each State. If the State governments were then to pass the laws that affected the interaction between the people living within a State, then it could be said that the purpose of the federal government was to pass laws which affected the interaction of the States between each other…oh, and to provide for the common defense of the whole nation as well.
This separation, or division of power between the federal and State governments was explained by none other than the Father of our Constitution, James Madison in Federalist 45, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.”
THE FACT IS that our government was created with 3 distinct branches; each with their own sphere of authority, and each with the ability to restrain the others from overstepping the authority granted them. This concept, or principle is what we were once taught in school; the checks and balances of our federal constitution.
Yet there were those who, during the period which saw our Constitution come into existence, felt that it did not provide sufficient guards to prevent the government it establishes from overstepping its authority and become tyrannical and oppressive. Among them was Patrick Henry, who questioned the strength of these checks and balances when he said, “There will be no checks, no real balances, in this Government: What can avail your specious imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances?”
The president cannot make law any more than Congress can enforce the laws which our government passes. Why is it that people today place so much attention upon the election of those whose job is to enforce the law, but not those who actually make the laws? Yet the fact is that people flock to the polls to vote for the candidate of their choice for president based upon all the campaign promises they make to ‘do things’ which they either agree or disagree with.
THE FACT IS that Congress is the lawmaking authority within our federal government; but it was established to represent the interests of two distinct bodies; the great body of the people, and the body of the States which comprise the Union. One could very well say that the States lost all say in what laws the federal government enacts after they lost the right to secede at the end of the Civil War. It was only made official when the 17th Amendment was ratified, making the election of the Senators by a vote of the people, not the State Legislatures.
In any case THE FACT IS that the powers granted our government are not unlimited and vague, they are few and specifically defined. Again, this fact is backed up by mountains of evidence which, unfortunately, very few care to accept.
For instance, in 1792 a bill was introduced to provide bounties, or subsidies as we call them today, to Cod Fisheries. During the debates over this bill, the young representative from Virginia, James Madison, said, “It is supposed, by some gentlemen, that Congress have authority not only to grant bounties in the sense here used, merely as a commutation for drawback, but even to grant them under a power by virtue of which they may do any thing which they may think conducive to the general welfare! This, sir, in my mind, raises the important and fundamental question, whether the general terms which have been cited are to be considered as a sort of caption, or general description of the specified powers; and as having no further meaning, and giving no further powers, than what is found in that specification, or as an abstract and indefinite delegation of power extending to all cases whatever…”
Madison would then go on to say, “If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, everything, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress… Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”
As already proven, in Federalist 45 Madison said, “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined.” If I were to give you a shopping list containing a few items I wanted you to purchase for me, those items are, what one might call, specifically enumerated. Specifically enumerated items are at the complete opposite end of the spectrum from unlimited and vague; such as if I were to give you $20 and tell you to go to the store and buy some food. In one instance my instructions are clear and specific; in the other they are vague and general. The same goes for the powers granted our government by the Constitution; they are very specific as to what powers our government may exercise.
Yet these FACTS do not seem to matter to people these days; they only care that their government is doing things which the people, depending upon their political ideologies, believe is in the best interests of the nation.
Principle only matters in political discussion today as it pertains to the principles held by either of the two political parties. People either adhere to the principles of the Democratic Party, or liberal principles or the principles of the Republican Party, or supposedly ‘conservative’ principles.
Yet the principles of the men who actually wrote the Constitution, and participated in putting it into effect, no longer seem to matter to people these days. I hear all the time that the Constitution is a living document, subject to interpretation and changing times. This belief is such a crock of manure that whenever I hear it I feel both angered and sick to my stomach.
Our Constitution is not a general guide, or list of recommended suggestions for the powers government shall exercise, it is the law which both established our government, and limits its actions. This fact was affirmed by the Supreme Court in 1866, “The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people, equally in war and in peace, and covers with the shield of its protection all classes of men, at all times, and under all circumstances. No doctrine, involving more pernicious consequences, was ever invented by the wit of men than that any of its provisions can be suspended during any of the great exigencies of government. Such a doctrine leads directly to anarchy or despotism.”
The belief that our Constitution can evolve as time passes to meet the needs of current generations is so dangerous to what America was founded upon that I can hardly believe that anyone even believes that rubbish. One of the best quotes describing my views on the Constitution comes from Justice Antonin Scalia, who recently passed away under, what I can only call ‘suspicious’ circumstances, “The Constitution that I interpret and apply is not living but dead, or as I prefer to call it, enduring. It means today not what current society, much less the court, thinks it ought to mean, but what it meant when it was adopted.”
Do you get that, or is that too deep for your feeble mentalities; the Constitution means now the exact same things it meant when it was first adopted back in 1789; it has not changed in the slightest degree. The ONLY thing which has changed is how much people care about what it says, and fight to see how strictly it is adhered to.
You can call yourselves Americans, or patriots until you are blue in the face; you can vote for all the Republicans or Democrats you want, it won’t make you a patriot or a freedom loving American until you start voting for principle over political party ideologies!
One only has to note that something Charles Austin Beard said is commonplace today to realize that the takeover of America by those seeking to subvert the principles of freedom and liberty is complete, “You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for independence.”
When the principles for which our Founding Fathers fought, bled and died for become offensive to society in general you know that the dumbing down of America and the indoctrination into the belief that government is our caretaker and protector is complete. When those who fight for their liberty are viewed as threats to society or terrorists, you will know that what Thomas Jefferson feared has come to pass, “Can it be believed that a grateful people will suffer [individuals] to be consigned to execution, whose sole crime has been the developing and asserting their rights?”
When all these things come to pass you can rest assured that the downfall of the experiment in self governance and the concept that government was established to protect our liberty has all but failed. And the sad thing is, you only have yourselves to blame.