Skip to comments.Put America’s First Principle Back Into Practice
Posted on 02/02/2014 10:09:40 AM PST by Jacquerie
Conservatives believe, as did our founding generation, a fundamental truth, a maxim that early on differentiated the US from other republics. The first principle of American political society is that government exists to secure our unalienable rights. Our Declaration eloquently expressed it as, That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, . . .
That straightforward concept begat the question, How to best secure those rights?
The answer was to be found in some form of republican government. By that, the founding generation meant the peoples representatives consent to all laws. That determination was all well and good, but was insufficient, for it left the difficult and decade long task of devising the particulars, the nuts and bolts of how to implement republican, freedom preserving government in thirteen suddenly independent societies that sometimes, (as now) confused republicanism with democracy.
Thirteen societies went their own ways in various grand experiments in self-government. About half continued an English tradition, a bill of rights in or alongside their legislatively adopted constitutions. Not all states were very successful in keeping their eye on the ball, of designing government for the single purpose of securing the unalienable rights of their people. The burdens of war exasperated lofty republican ideals such that some states approached something closer to democratic government than freedom enhancing republics. For instance, ones wealth wasnt always secure from tender laws and taxation approaching confiscation. Despots around the civilized world silently cheered as the American experiment appeared certain to founder on the shoals of too much of the democratic element.
With these experiences in mind, our Framers learned enough to design a government in 1787 that did not depend on a bill of rights, but rather one which strove to secure freedom by dividing power. They depended on the structure of their design, which set interests against interests, rather than the parchment barrier of a bill of rights, which they knew from experience to be an unreliable bulwark against tyranny.
Other patriots demanded a formal bill of rights and were rewarded with ten amendments that stated in no uncertain terms our rights to religious and press freedom, to protect ourselves and communities through force of arms, to be secure in our persons, personal papers and other possessions from unreasonable searches, to demand search warrants and grand juries, to not be subject to two trials for the same offense, no self-incrimination nor confiscation of property but for public use in exchange for just compensation, speedy and public trials, impartial juries, counsel for trial defense, no excessive bail nor cruel punishments.
Oh, and because the drafters of these amendments knew they couldnt possibly list all of our unalienable rights, they determined that the rights they didnt enumerate could not be denied to the people. To cap it off, the states retained every power they didnt grant to the government they created. Airtight right?
Look at subsequent history. With the exceptions of quartering troops and defense counsel at trials, none of the first ten amendments are in near full force, and most are, for practical purposes, gone from the American scene. Why did our government drop the ball? When did we forget the singular purpose of government? When did government begin to pick off, one by one, our unalienable rights? When did DC begin to shift focus from securing our rights and toward so-called social justice?
They were trampled by a majoritarian government that beginning in 1913 featured popular elections for members of the Senate.
It began when the lessons of our immediate postcolonial experiences were forgotten or ignored, when the Left sold forgetful Americans the snake oil of democracy. Power to the people! Those stiff, rich and out of touch state appointed senators stand in the way of the people!
Our Framers relied on the structure of the constitution, its vertical and horizontal divisions of power, and not a bill of rights to secure freedom. Today, most people actually equate democracy with freedom. The legitimate purpose of government, to secure our rights was forgotten and replaced with whatever a Leftist majority, and recently minority, thinks it can get away with. Obama won twice, get over it and do as you are told.
Until power is divided once again, until the national government is re-federalized, the DC uniparty will chip away at what little remains of our rights, and our continued descent into the hell of democratic tyranny is assured.
It might be too late. Perhaps the people are too corrupt to care, but that is no excuse for conservatives to not support an Article V state amendment convention to reestablish first principles, and correct the Leftist wrongs in our constitution
Whom do you trust, in our current crop of power-grabbers, to attend and write an Article V Constitution? I don’t trust any of them. States will send their worst party bottom-feeders as delegates, I guarantee it. The party hacks will have a field day.
Meanwhile, did you know George Soros is also pushing for an Article V?
I don’t like the idea of an Article V in this environment. I am confident there will be many good folks along to gently explain to me why I’m wrong, and I’m willing to listen.
“...Perhaps the people are too corrupt to care...”
Or too ignorant...
Thanks! We need to remember, be reminded often, that even though things don’t look great, or necessarily in our favor, to keep on fighting the good fight. It is not just for us, but for the generations that follow, that we must lay down our own form of sacrifice for the better good. We will then stand before God with a clear conscience. Some seem to forget that this life is not he one that counts, but that the things DONE in this life have consequences into the next. For good or for bad.
I didn't know Soros was on the side of our Framers. Strange bedfellows indeed.
BTTT your most excellent piece!
Most of the current population is definitely too ignorant, having been kept that way by the corruption in the educational system.
My problem with it is that even it was a sound conservative out come it would be adhered to anymore than the constitution we already have.
I do support the idea of states banding together to tell the feds to stuff it.
would = wouldn’t
>>Until power is divided once again, until the national government is re-federalized, <<
Not re-federalized, what we need is for it to be de-federalized. Get the feds out of every nook and cranny of our lives and get them back into the business that they should be which is defense of the nation as a whole. Now they defend every international corporation that contributes to our political system. The EPA is a mess. So is the NEA, the BLM, Army Corps of Engineers. You name it and the feds have screwed it up good.
And I’m sure George Soros wants the same Constitution that would come out of an Article V as the founders would have, right? Strange bedfellows indeed. No, Soros likes the idea because he sees it as a chance to wipe us out, once and for all.
I do not disagree with the need for something major needing to be done to get us to the founding principles. As Las Vegas Ron points out, what assurances do we have the newly formed government wouldn’t weasel around the new document? It will be the same bunch of lawyers weaseling the document we have now. I suppose we could write in a clause that all current office-holders are forbidden to occupy positions in the new government, but they are like teeth on a shark: A newer, deadlier row of them are line up right behind the ones presently in use.
Probability of achieving what we need to do? Pretty slight, but then the odds have been against us from the Founding, so what’s new?
I suspect my legislature is typical of the other 56, minus CA, IL, NY(?). It is a part time gig, in session for three months. Most reps are independent business people and know very well of the heavy DC hand. My rep is a nurseryman, 1,000 acres under cultivation and 150 employees. He doesn't need the added time burden required to be a rep.
I'm saying we shouldn't equate state pubbies and democrats with their pompous, tyrannical cousins in DC.
Article V is the only peaceful means we have. Let's use it.
An all powerful central government that enforces law arbitrarily is not much different than anarchy.
Great post!! Thanks, Jacquerie.
IMHO, all we need to do is enforce the constitution we have now. The only problem with it is that it is not followed.
I think at this point the best way to accomplish that is through the states....for a peaceful resolution anyway.
We need an Article V state amendment convention to reestablish first principles so badly my old bones dream about it every night. The Feds needs to be cut back and the States need to be stepped up to the front seats. Let the people decide what rules and laws they want in their own states.
The United Nations was put together for the express purpose of the New World Order plan. The United Nations Agenda 21 is part of that plan and it has taken hold in every local government that I know of. The most disheartening part is most people have no idea it is happening right under their noses.
How do we awaken the general populace?
Nothing is guaranteed, but I know that over half the states filed suit against Obamacare. AZ was told it couldn't defend its southern border. States around the nation are so much as told not to identify voters. The media purposely avoid our nascent resistance movement. Good. Let it build below the national radar.
So I believe the states know they can perhaps regain the power taken away from them 101 years ago. I doubt the states will dance around the edges, for structural reforms are needed and they know it, regardless of party.
Structural changes, like repeal of the 17th cannot be ignored.
If, as you predict, the states will weasel around amendments, we'll be no worse off.
If 2/3ds of the state agree, an amendment can go to the states, where 3/4 have to ratify it before it becomes part of the Constitution.
The movement is building for the time being primarily where it should, in the state legislatures. They will meet in June in Indianapolis to hash out more convention details.
When the time comes, perhaps when the 30th state has filed an identical application to congress, the Obamamedia will get their orders when to come down on us.
I look forward to it, for that means we'll have them for once fighting on our turf.
Well, I don’t know about an Article V convention pros and cons. Like you, I imagine others think they do. The Marxists/Socialist/Democrats will be there (Convention) though so who can guarantee they won’t score some points? And, what points would they score? Bottom line, it would be the Left vs the Right with The Left having the media on their side. Not good odds for the right.
So, clearly, an Article V conventions success or failure depends entirely on who or what is controlling it? Can Conservatives control it? I doubt it because the MSM (Marxist Socialist Media) will be full bore behind their fellow Marxist Socialist Democrats.
So, if you take away an Article V Convention, HOW THE HELL DO YOU FIX THIS F’d UP COUNTRY?
To a certainty, no collection of 536 humanoids in Washington, either in 2014, 2017, 2020 or 2030 will. We know now that these people get elected and travel to Washington and sooner rather than later become corrupted.
So, what’s the fix? I suggest that in places like California, where there is a concentration of Liberals, that they be allowed socially to do whatever the hell they want to do as long as they pay for it! The same would go for such sister states, just to name some, as Massachusetts, Connectticut, Maine, Oregon, Washington and so on.
The ONLY “Union” per se then would be Defense and Foreign Policy. If Maine wants to let boys in the girls bathroom but Texas beats the boys ass with a paddle, so be it! If California only wanted the criminals to have guns, so be it. Not my business here in Texas.
Finally, big media must be broken up, Scotus terms should not be life, Scotus mental faculties physicals should be required past 60, term limits put in place, the National Legislature should adhere to the Texas model, the Capital should be moved to Dallas/Ft Worth because it is the middle of the country and very conservative so we can keep an eye on them, and, most of all, contributions limited to individuals and $1,000 max. Campaign air time to be allocated amongst all candidates and be Free. Double Voter ID, citizenship, and employment required to vote.
Lobbyists should be totally outlawed.
The foregoing would get us headed in the right direction but I could write a book on details and other “fixes”
One thing is for certain and that is, like a ten year old truck with a million miles on it, the owner (USA) is going to have to either rebuild it or get rid of it.
The framers set interest against interest to secure our rights. The states have a different viewpoint than joe blow voter.
Consider this, if the states appointed senators, would anti-10th amendment jurists have a chance to a federal bench if their past writings expressed disdain for the 10th?
Want to repeal Roe and a host of unconstitutional decisions? Repeal the 17th and watch.
Good post. The federal government is lawless and accountable only unto itself.
Article V is worth trying; it is constitutional and it MIGHT work.
But then again it might not work, and I would accept that it probably won’t work.
So then, what are the alternatives?
Conservatives/libertarians could leave the country en masse and colonize and found a new society? Our forefathers did this. Is this still possible?
Is secession a possibility? People are staring to regionally sort themselves out on an ideological basis. NH has a freedom movement encouraging those that believe in smaller government to relocate there. Should we look to parts of the American NW? Can we convince governors and state politicians to adopt this course of action?
When the tyranny hits, and it will hit hard if we fail, will we develop secret societies and safe-houses? Will we have the courage to resist?
At the Virginia ratification convention on June 6th 1788, Madison responded to Patrick Henrys charge that the Constitutions enumerated powers would be usurped and our freedoms destroyed by a national government that would quickly seize all power.
Madison: If the general government were wholly independent of the governments of the particular states, then, indeed, usurpation might be expected to the fullest extent. But, sir, on whom does this general government depend? It derives its authority from these governments, and from the same sources from which their authority is derived.
Like you, I am under no illusions. We know the regime is ruthless. The consolidated government will do all it possibly can behind the scenes to avoid an amendment convention of the states. Perhaps all they need do is quietly bribe or threaten a few key statehouse members.
I don’t want to think of the alternative, yet I am positive that Marx cannot be indefinitely grafted onto Madison.
Step 1 - Convention of the states.
Step 2 - Impeach Obama.
Step 3 - Indict and try Obama.
Step 4 - Imprison Obama for life.
That is a good list.
Works for me!
I like your ideas. An excellent list to work. Others are coming out in this thread.
You mention the States, and I alluded to some of the problems I see. Example: Last weekend, the AZGOP voted in their annual meeting to Censure Juan McQueeg for his liberal, Democrat loving ways. Before we get all happy about them doing that, let’s bear in mind they had to be dragged to it screaming and kicking by the rank and file (The Censure was a Floor Motion, brought to a vote because 20% of the State Committeemen signed a petition). The rank and file aren’t going to be the people to decide on the delegates who go to an Article V convention. No, they will be the people who were dragged.
Not only will they not do what they want, they will settle scores. With us. In the process they will give the liberals whatever they want because they don’t have an argument.
I have to assume the GOPe is just as sclerotic in more than enough states to yield a pathetic majority of conventioneers.
That sounds like a Constitutional Amendment. I thought we were talking about an Article V convention, called by 3/4 of the states?
It would mean a “new government” when a sufficient number of states ratify the outcome of a convention. If that outcome is a nice, fat socialist package you will see the demagogues come out in volume louder than we’ve ever seen before. You think it’s bad now? Every Fabian Socialist in the Hemisphere will be running ads supporting the new Hope and Change.
The rats control DC. All of it. The America of my grandparents is a memory. America is a police state. Yet there is one avenue, a gift from our framers that is outside the control of our oppressors.
You may be right. Our only hope is enough state legislators act on what they all know. I am under no illusion that America is salvageable. I am however, positive that history will not look well on a people who gaffed off the chance to restore republican freedom. If we do, we deserve the misery that awaits us.
My oops. It is not certain that America can be salvaged.
If the States weren’t as rotten as DeeCee, we might have had a chance. The people running the states are too fat, dumb and happy with the current state of affairs.
Nobody on “our” side wants to lead, so we have the situation where the GOPe is more than happy to let the Rats run things. I’m afraid that may be true at the state level too, in which case it’s going to require a complete collapse and Revolution 2.0.
I know the GOP in AZ is a wreck, and no help at all. They had to be dragged feet-first to do just an almost meaningless gesture. I am not as familiar with the other states. I can’t imagine enough of them calling for an Article V, or even a straight Amendment. I do see them ratifying the results if it’s Marxist enough.
Didn’t say my knowledge of it is perfect, I just have a good idea of the players involved.
Your argument is specious. The states must ratify any amendment that the COS proposes. Rabid socialism would not cross the ratification threshold. I see no reason for anxiety here. Beyond that, what is the fear of losing the constitution? The government mearly gives lip service to it now. It is so bad that the leadership of the very people we elected in 2010 are trying to make citizens of invading foriegn nationals for the purpose of...? No, I see very little risk from a convention of states. And I see no hope without one.
Maybe you can first explain to me what "an Article V Constitution" is?
A century of government schooling and pro-socialist media propaganda have blinded us to the first cause of government - securing our rights.
Awesome post, Jac. You’re correct that we’ve reached a point where something drastic has to be done to rein in the federal leviathan, and that an Article V convention could go a long way to accomplishing that (in the main).
Personally, I’m a bit further down the road from there. I’ve lost faith that we can get to where we really need to be through our established constitutional system of government. I think we’ve reached a point where words on paper have little impact on the beast.
Our redemption is in our history. If only we can grasp it.
OK, don’t believe me when I say the level of demagoguery will ascend to a level you’ve never seen before. Don’t believe me when I tell you the pressure to ratify a Soviet-style constitution will be irresistible to the spineless chumps we have in government today. Don’t believe me when I tell you it will pass, and then be interpreted in the worst way possible.
I was giving input on a FR thread, and you know you always get what you pay for. I’ll admit it, I don’t know Shineola about the precise mechanics of what’s going to happen. I just know how the individuals involved will perform. Imagine the poorest level you can, then imagine some more and take it a couple notches further down.
This discussion is the the result of a book by a lawyer, and lawyers are perpetually surprised by the outcomes of these things. Have you ever wondered why that is? Because they’re book-smart and street stupid.
You are simply wrong about this. Call me names and rubbish my comments all you want, I don't care.
Damnifino. You figure it out. Enjoy your socialism.
Yes it is, which is why I've said here dozens of times, that the Constitution has been overturned. We must now look to the Declaration for guidance.
You are simply wrong about this. Call me names and rubbish my comments all you want, I don't care.
Friend, I think your hair's on fire.
Three quarters of the state legislatures in this country are not going to abandon all common sense, history, tradition, and their best interests, and vote to radically alter the Constitution in such a way that it becomes the foundation for a new Marxist state.
The representatives attending an Article V convention will go into it knowing that millions of Americans are as terrified of the process and outcome as you are. These people have to return home and face the people of their respective states. I guarantee you, they'll be taking their jobs very seriously, as none of them want to wind up as casualties for attempting something as radical as what you're suggesting.
These lilly-livers are going to abandon every principle they have when it starts. OK, call me FOS, and hair on fire. You trust them? I don't, and you can't convince me otherwise. Let's see.
You said: Three quarters of the state legislatures in this country are not going to abandon all common sense, history, tradition, and their best interests, and vote to radically alter the Constitution in such a way that it becomes the foundation for a new Marxist state.
Yes, they most certainly will. Call me what you will, rubbish my posts, doesn't change a thing. They will if they're convinced not caving totally will cost them their sinecures. You think they'll face hostile constituents if they cave, I disagree because of the demagoguery and propaganda that's about to be unleashed. People will not be demanding they stay with their constitutional principles, they'll be demanding they bring on the Marxism, the faster the better. The "Gibsmedat."
You, my FRiend, are underestimating the competition.
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!