No; a caste is something you're born into — your theory, while closer to what the Constitution specifies, would deny [lawful] immigrants from having a say in the government. {I considered using the term "ruling class", but the political-oligarchy we have is much more caste-like than not.}
It’s easier keeping people down when they are convinced there’s nothing that they can do about their condition, when there is - and if there really weren’t, the people you’re assuming are the exclusive ruling class wouldn’t spend so much of their resources trying to convince you otherwise.
[Somewhat] Agreed; but here's the big question when, if ever, will a significant portion of the people [say 5%] cheer an attack on government? Joseph Stack [if I recall the name right], the guy who flew a plane into the IRS building because of that agency's lawlessness was resoundingly condemned — and yet now we have evidence of that agency's corruption, perhaps even more widespread than he thought.
I disagree, in part, due to the 'adventures' I've had in trying to challenge contraconstitutional statutes (state-level, via that State's constitution) — there is, apparently, no way to challenge the statute [in the legal arena] without violating that [invalid] statute. This is troublesome because this forces you to argue from the position of The Accused, reducing your argument to something that can be hand-wavily dismissed as equivalent to "but you're wrong too"-style arguments.
I understand what you’re staying about the legal term of standing, but those people in Washington actually work for you and me, believe it or not. And there are some of them who recognize this, and some of those who do who both believe this clown-in-chief should be impeached, and are in a position to initiate it.
It's more than that; by all rights, the military should be arresting the NSA agents. The NSA has, after all, violated the 4th and 5th amendments on a scale that qualifies as warfare against the general population
, their 'secret court' (really, a secret court!?) blatantly violates the 6th amendment, and the military is sworn to protect and defend the Constitution against even domestic enemies.
No, again, you’ve made the wrong assumption, regardless of your definition of caste.
I think we’re going to continue to disagree about the rest, as well. I was not suggesting some kind of an attack on government, and am not sure why you went there in reference to what I wrote. We have a long way to go, maybe, but sitting around and thinking only about the distance isn’t going to get us there.