Warning: This may offend some, but the truth often does. If that’s a problem, I suggest you think long and hard about your own beliefs before you attack the messenger. So, if you are allergic to the truth, I suggest you stop reading NOW before your precious feelings get hurt.

For some reason this morning I awoke thinking in medical terms as it pertains to people and how they think about politics and government. The terms that came to mind were flatliners, vegetative state, and brain dead. I honestly don’t mean to be insulting, but when it comes to those subjects I don’t see much cognitive activity in people; and this is based primarily upon the fact that their beliefs cannot be supported by credible evidence or fact.

In a letter to Samuel Cooper, Samuel Adams wrote, “Mankind are governed more by their feelings than by reason.” What he meant by that is that mankind, in general, allow their emotions to dictate their decision making process rather than to take a long careful look at all sides of an issue before coming to a decision. I can’t argue with that; especially after having seen how people react to hot topic issues that stir the emotions and enflame their passions.

People may believe they are thinking, but are they? Or, are they reacting emotionally based upon preconceived beliefs formed after years, if not decades, of indoctrination and mental conditioning? If you want my honest opinion, I’d have to say it was the latter. I think people would prefer to have false facts spoon fed to them by false and ambitious men than they would to spend any amount of time digging for the truth on their own. I also think that once this conditioning has set in, it becomes next to impossible to convince people that they are not in possession of the truth; so they go on making decisions based upon faulty information.

Like I said, I don’t mean to be insulting – I think it is just human nature; and I think that throughout history the percentage of people who actually use their brains to seriously think about things of great importance has always been relatively small in comparison to the total number of people living at the time. Unfortunately, when this occurs as it pertains to government it leads to ambitious and designing men gaining the seats of power within a system, thereby depriving those they rule over of their liberty.

You see that wouldn’t bother me so much if the things the government they choose to support did not affect me or my liberty – but it does affect me – and therefore the ignorance and apathy of the masses angers me beyond my ability to explain by mere words alone.

The majority of people living in America today fall either to the political left or the political right; meaning they are either Republicans or Democrats. That wouldn’t be so bad if the platform of one of the two parties was a strict adherence to the few delegated powers found within the Constitution and the preservation of the liberty of the parties, (the states and the people), government represents. Unfortunately, neither party gives a rats ass about those things; with both being equally guilty of violating our rights and overstepping their delegated authority.

Yet when anyone attempts to get others to see through the charade of the two party system they become outcasts; targets of insult, and often injury, heaped upon them by those who place their faith and trust in a broken system. Historian Charles Austin Beard once wrote, “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 struggle for independence.”

What does that say about the people of any country when the thoughts and ideas of those who established that country are considered dangerous, or impolitic? It’s as Dresden James said, “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.” I know this for a fact, because most people think I’m nuts for the things I write and say; and that’s assuming they have the inclination to spend a few moments of their time reading my rants.

I wonder if people have ever given any real thought to why the American Revolution was fought – probably not. Most people only believe what they have been taught, that it was about taxes on tea, stamps and sugar. But it wasn’t so much the taxes themselves as it was the fact that they had no say in whether or not those taxes would be imposed upon them. It was also about the fact that those taxes violated, what they believed to be, their fundamental Natural Rights; things which no form of government ought to be allowed to violate.

Those we call our Founders, those men who signed the Declaration of Independence, were ready and willing to risk their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to uphold the principles they believed in – and many of them did lose much in the ensuing war to obtain what they valued so highly – liberty. Many of them lost their homes, or found themselves penniless after the Revolution. So, to put it in terms you might understand, they put their money where their mouths were…literally.

Yet within 5 years of obtaining the liberty they fought so hard for, power hungry men rose up and drafted a constitution with so many flaws and so few protections for liberty, that it was bound to end up destroying what the patriots of 1776 had fought for.

I used to think the Constitution was the greatest thing since sliced bread; back before I obtained enough knowledge of the ratification process to learn differently. My thoughts and feelings about the Constitution can best be summed up by something Lysander Spooner said, “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case it is unfit to exist.” Yet when I speak these thoughts aloud I get looks from people like I ought to be hung for treason.

Prior to the Revolution, Boston clergyman Mather Byles spoke out against independence, stating, “Which is better – to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?” If you ask me, his words are almost prophetic, as we shook off the yoke of tyranny imposed upon us by King George III, only to replace it with a tyrannical government of our own creation.

It may seem that my thoughts and beliefs are radical, even dangerous, but had you spent the amount of time that I have studying the ratification of the Constitution you would have learned that those who opposed the Constitution predicted that it would create the type of government we have today; one which has consolidated all power under the federal head and one which has deprived the people of the liberty government is supposed to be securing for the people.

Am I the only one, (I know I’m not, but it is a rhetorical question) who finds that many of the most devoted proponents of liberty spoke out in opposition to the proposed Constitution? Patrick Henry, the man who spoke the immortal words, “Give me liberty or give me death” did all that was in his power to fight against the implementation of the government outlined by the Constitution.

Richard Henry Lee, the man who presented the Resolution to the 2nd Continental Congress declaring that “…That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States…” wrote 18 essays, going into great detail the dangers he saw within the system of government being proposed.

Robert Yates, a delegate from the State of New York, left the Constitutional Convention because he felt that the convention was exceeding their delegated authority to amend the Articles of Confederation. Along with New York delegate John Lansing they wrote a letter to New York Governor George Clinton informing him of what was going on in Philadelphia. Then, Yates would go on to pen 16 essays which tore the Constitution to shreds; Article by Article.

Yet today I can’t even get people to accept the fact that the government we have at this moment in time does not come close to resembling the one that existed in the time of the men who were alive when it was established, and who would go on to become President; men like George Washington, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and James Madison.

If I can’t get people to accept that, and stop supporting this government, how can I be expected to get them to accept that the Constitution itself is a seriously flawed document and that it does not provide us with any real means of checking the powers exercised by the government it establishes?

To keep this as short as possible, allow me to present you with 4 quotes from speeches given by Patrick Henry in opposition to the proposed government which is outlined by the Constitution.

-My great objection to this Government is, that it does not leave us the means of defending our rights, or of waging war against tyrants.

-The Honorable Gentleman who presides, told us, that to prevent abuses in our Government, we will assemble in Convention, recall our delegated powers, and punish our servants for abusing the trust reposed in them. Oh, Sir, we should have fine times indeed, if to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people. Your arms wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone; and you have no longer an aristocratical; no longer democratical spirit. Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation, brought about by the punishment of those in power, inflicted by those who had no power at all?

-And, Sir, would not all the world, from the Eastern to the Western hemisphere, blame our distracted folly in resting our rights upon the contingency of our rulers being good or bad. Shew me that age and country where the rights and liberties of the people were placed on the sole chance of their rulers being good men, without a consequent loss of liberty? I say that the loss of that dearest privilege has ever followed with absolute certainty, every such mad attempt.

-Where is the responsibility — that leading principle in the British government? In that government a punishment, certain and inevitable, is provided: But in this, there is no real actual punishment for the grossest maladministration. They may go without punishment, though they commit the most outrageous violation on our immunities. That paper may tell me they will be punished. I ask, by what law? They must make the law — for there is no existing law to do it. What — will they make a law to punish themselves? This, Sir, is my great objection to the Constitution, that there is no true responsibility — and that the preservation of our liberty depends on the single chance of men being virtuous enough to make laws to punish themselves.

Tell me, if you can back it up with facts, that what Mr. Henry said is not true. Tell me that your government, for I refuse to call it mine, does not use force and coercion to compel your obedience to laws that have been passed which are not in accordance to the delegated powers given government. And if that is not tyranny, I don’t know what is.

A friend of mine on Facebook posted a quote by the anarchist Voltairine de Cleyre which states, “So long as the people do not care to exercise their freedom, those who wish to tyrannize will do so; for tyrants are active and ardent, and will devote themselves in the name of any number of gods, religious and otherwise, to put shackles on sleeping men.”

Then my friend commented on her own post by saying, “Tyrants don’t need to be all that “active and ardent” any longer. This bitch is practically on auto-pilot right now. You know everything is “in place” when the people themselves not only do not exercise their own freedoms, but work hard to restrict and rob the rights of those who try to.”

That’s why I both love and feel deeply saddened by the film the Matrix; for in it there is a scene when Morpheus is telling Neo about being on the lookout while inside the Matrix. In that scene Morpheus tells Neo, “The Matrix is a system, Neo. That system is our enemy. But when you’re inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”

If you were to replace the word Matrix with government, you would see exactly how I, and others feel about you. You are part of the system that deprives me, and others like me, of our liberty. You vote for candidates who run for office on platforms to do things they are not allowed to do. You support measures which deprive us of our rights or our property, (our income), to make you feel safe and secure. Then you oppose and fight those of us who try to open your eyes to the truth. You have become either dependent upon a system that enslaves you, or you simply don’t care and let those tyrants get away with murder…often literally; as in the case of Waco, Ruby Ridge, and LaVoy Finicum.

That’s why I awoke this morning thinking in medical terms; because brain dead is about the best description of the typical American voter that I have found to date.

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.