Well, “in short” — it pans out this way, from the way I see it.
If conservatives are representing the majority of the voting public, then they can work through the political mechanisms and get elected representatives who will support these issues (in the political sphere).
On the other hand, if conservatives represent so few of the voting public that they are “overrun” by others who oppose the conservative’s views and political persuasions, then *this* would be — also — done by the political mechanisms which the founding fathers set up — thereby “overriding” the conservatives and their opinions.
Now, it seems to me, that there are certain ones saying that if they are “out-voted” in the political sphere — and things change politically (because of this) — then — *this* justify the armed revolution, because it’s not the way the founding fathers would have wanted or what they set up.
I’m saying that — if — in the political system, conservatives are out-voted and are (as seems...) “overrun” in what they want government to do — then the problem is not the political system and how it has gone against the conservatives — but rather — with the mass of people who don’t go along with the conservatives. And if that is the case — then there are people who are advocating armed revolution for being in the *minority* — and because they can’t persuade the mass of the voting public to go along with them and their political aims.
That’s the problem. And that’s why I won’t be participating in an armed revolution, but rather, working in the political sphere...
Our founders understood that and those participating in the revolt only represented about 1/3 of the people at the time...another 1/3 were torries in favor of the King, and the other 1/3 wanted to pretty much be left alone. It is good that the 1/3 had the strength of conviction that they had.
Bottom line, certainly we work within the political process. But if the political process becomes tyranny and life and liberty are threatrend by tyrants, then we use the other measn the founders also left in the constitution.
I pray it never comes to that...but I am grateful they understood human nature so well as to provide for it in the unlikely event it is ever required...and that that very point is clear fo anyone who might otherwise think about usurping those liberties.
And just exactly how would having a media that is mostly censored by one party play out in your fair scenario of the civil system? I've traveled around in the last few years. It appears that all the countries in the entire west are experiencing massive lies and distortion of information.