Delegate Allocation Watch: Ken Cuccinelli beats out Paul Manafort in Virginia.
Ted Cruz ensures that another ten delegates in Virginia (out of thirteen) are ultimately loyal to *him*.Read More »
We are here met on a great uncivil war battlefield for the hearts and minds of the inhabitants of the world. Because of that, we are all terrified and perceived as terrorists by the others.
Courage manifests in proportion to action in the face of terror. Terror provokes varying degrees of the responses, fight, flight, or immobility. You know, in your heart of hearts, that you are terrified. Do you have sufficient courage to examine your response?
We are all justifiably terrified. I surmise, the general reasons for feeling such, have not changed over the span of human history, but, the means to know about threats and the means for individuals and groups to act upon the baser aspects of human nature, have never been greater. That, at its root, is the basis of our terror.
Individuals and societies have always had to confront the need for watchfulness against the other that the baser aspects of human nature compels. To facilitate the watchfulness and to promote increased tranquility, social contracts were formed and the responsibility to enforce social contracts were delegated to structures which have come to be known as government.
Today, as always, the subsidiary purposes of government are to decide if it is lawful to have grass of a certain height, or taxes of a certain amount, or whether the penalty for certain violation of a social contract ought to mean forfeiture of life. The primary purpose of government is, and has been, the control of human nature. To that end multiple forms have been tried, and retried, as if failed forms of the past might currently work because human nature had changed. Certainly, in the course of recorded history, no matter the source of record, human nature has not changed. The governments of despots will result in the death of millions, whether in the time of Cyrus the Persian or Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, or Wilson.
There will be tensions among whether government ought to be ruled by a chosen one, or a chosen few, or by the whole of society. There will be tension between those who come to decisions based upon their feelings and those who come to decisions based upon reproducible factual evidence. Out of all these tensions, and a review of tried and failed proposed solutions, came a convention of men that brought to the world the finest document to structure a government. It was a document which brought under control all the competing forces of their time, and, for all time, created a structure of government purposed to eradicate the worst aspects of human nature from disrupting social order and to hold off its re-emergence. That document was the Constitution of the United States.
Because human nature has not changed, Benjamin Franklin’s response, given when asked what type of government he had participated in creating, is still pertinent, “A republic, if you can keep it.” Additionally, because the adversarial tension between those who believe themselves, or they and a close cohort of experts, best to govern the masses, Lincoln’s words at Gettysburg are still apropos. “Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether [this] nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure . . . that this nation, UNDER GOD, shall have a new birth of freedom – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”
Between those two timeless statements is encapsulated the civil war in which we find ourselves engaged, between the forces of socialism and federal republic, on a national stage, and on an international stage, among the philosophies of Judeo-Christianity, Islam, and Humanism.
Josef Stalin, in his “Marxism and the National Question” (Prosveshcheniye, Nos. 3 -5, March – May 1913) astutely defined a nation as:
A stable community of people, which is not organized by race, nor tribe, but formed on the basis of a:
Common language, within a
Common territory, sharing a,
Common economic life, that has economic cohesion, because of a
Common history, that results in, a
Common culture manifesting as a common psychological make-up and common perception of national purpose.
Upon reflection, isn’t a basis of our terror derived because of assault on every aspect of these five fundamentals that create the sense of nationhood? Are you surprised that attacks have come upon our society at the exact points Stalin told Progressives to attack us?
While the majority of U.S. citizens have politically dozed that someone else would protect and keep their Republic, certainly in excess of a century, others have passed to their posterity, tirelessly, the concept that nations must be organized not in territorial bodies but in simple associations of persons governed by social democracy. (Otto Bauer, Die Nationalitatenfrage und die Sozialdemokratie, 1907) There is overwhelming evidence that it is to such a philosophy the current ruling regime of the United States adheres. The question hangs is the philosophy of the regime, the social aspiration of the majority of the citizens?
In simpler, more explicit terms, the motivation behind constantly seeking new groups of hyphenated- Americans is a desire to create simple associations to pit against each other, to both, create artificial social crises, and, to create territorial-nation destroying opportunities for populist demagogues to offer themselves as a panacea. In other words, the Progressive Movement which creates crises, then offers itself as a solution to crises, while it metastasizes within the Republican and Democrat Parties.
Upon reflection, isn’t a basis of our terror derived from indecision whether we should participate in what seems leading to the dissolution of the United States by joining an association or fight to maintain a territorial-based nation?
Upon reflection, isn’t a basis for our terror the diminution of our economic opportunities because of an ever increasing usurpation of control of the means of production by government either, by regulation or by direct take over? Nationalization of the means of production whether by the right, as fascism, or by the left, as socialism to provide a stepping stone to communism, both require a powerful central government. The Founders of the United States were familiar with the concepts within the political movements of Fascism and Socialism, even though the specific terms had yet to be invented. The Constitution was specifically constructed to thwart the flourishing of those political forms. Therefore, it has been a successful tactic of the forces of big government to first seize control of the means of education, in order to, distort knowledge about the contents of the Constitution and why specific planks of the Constitution were inserted.
Another basis for our terror is controversy whether we should maintain a social contract that employs equal protection under laws, or change to a doctrine of social justice by which protection by laws is disproportionately dispensed, not by Justice blinded, but by a prejudiced Justice tipping the scales to ameliorate perceived injustices suffered by previous generations of members of a hyphenated-American association or class. A corollary derived from social justice is the distortion that equal opportunity to succeed as an outgrowth of equal protection under the law means equal successful outcome. If the equality of success cannot arrive by natural means, then that circumstance must be artificially created by the government through redistribution that takes from each according to his abilities to give to each according to his needs.
We are engaged in a great uncivil, lukewarm, war, testing whether this nation, or any nation, so conceived and so dedicated, can continue to endure . We are engaged in a massive cultural struggle for the minds and hearts of our citizens testing whether this nation, UNDER GOD, shall have a restoration of Constitutionally guaranteed freedom – that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. But, and this is the culmination of all of our channels leading to terror, how can we accomplish it?
Depending upon one’s degree of courage, the course of action, or inaction, to diminish a free floating sense of terror is somewhat straightforward. The strategy and tactics of Progressivism must be recognized in all of its manifestations and stopped at the source.
We must restore a common language. English must be declared the national language. No government document shall legally be written in any language but English. A significant reduction in the use of Latin legalese, also, would be beneficial.
We must have a common territory. Our borders must be defined and made impregnable. The impermeability of our borders, not consideration for the endangered status of a hypothetical albino cockroach, et al. must be the fundamental standard by which border security is put into place.
We must have a protected common economic life, that has economic cohesion. Commerce, in large measure, has no patriotism. No nation has withstood more than a hundred years under a system of a centralized bank, operating under a fractional banking system, issuing fiat money. The Federal Reserve System, that controls the economic life of the United States has been in existence for ninety-seven years. Is it any wonder the Republic is in the dire economic straits we find ourselves? The Fed must be abolished using the “one and twenty” strategy. The nation must return to sound money, a balanced budget, and a goal must be established to end deficit spending, even in time of crises and war.
We must restore education about our common history. To that end, the Federal Department of Education must be abolished. Even if it were a Constitutionally sanctioned agency of government, which it is not, this department has been singular with regulations promoting Progressive modified historical study that make the United States seem the embodiment of international imperialism and national genocide of indigenous peoples or the slave importer of the world. Such claptrap ought to be an illegal presentation of sedition.
Enabling a powerful central government must be resisted. The beast that has become the Federal government must be starved. A return to the limited powers delegated the Federal government under the Constitution must be restored by the recognition that the Supreme Court can and has made unconstitutional judgments. Those judgments must be exposed and retracted. All departments and regulatory agencies not permitted by the Constitution must be abolished. Most, if not all, the perceived benefits of Federally funded entitlement programs must become programs administered by the States, if they so choose, or must be borne as a responsibility by individuals.
All recommendations of new groups of hyphenated-Americans must become illegal. Protected status for various current hyphenated-American associations, whether by race, gender or sexual orientation must be repealed. We must have one nation ruled by equal protection under a body of laws that makes it explicitly clear that equality of justice means equal penalty for violation of the social contract; that equal opportunity for success does not result in equality of successfulness by all.
White demagogues and Black Race-Baiting Hustlers, also known as Poverty Pimps, are attempting to stir the emotions of Black citizens by falsely linking a justified movement to make being in the country illegally, illegal, with the civil rights struggles led by Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr.
As I was present in Washington, D.C. when he delivered that historic speech, I know that dissolving the Republic with fuzzy borders, unlimited illegal immigration, dilution of our unique American culture, both religious and historical, or the creation of unlimited new classes of hyphenated-Americans were not his intentions.
When Martin Luther King, Jr. spoke his “I Have A Dream” speech, he did so from an entirely American perspective. He did not call out for an increase in the numbers of hyphenated-Americans. He dreamt of a nation which would be a beautiful symphony of brotherhood – a phrase taken from an oath pledged by members of the thoroughly American fraternity of which he was a brother. In his speech, he told of dreaming of a time, when rather than a country of hyphenated-Americans, forming associations based upon race, gender, or national origin of ancestors, there would be little black boys and black girls able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.
M.L.K. had a dream that was a dream of restored national purpose springing from a common history. Even when that history was unfortunate and disastrous. He spoke of vicious racists, slums and ghettos of our northern cities, but it was our racists whose hearts needed softening, our slums and ghettos which needed revitalization. He called for a recognition of our common culture. “They have come to realize”, he said referencing White Americans, “that their freedom is inextricably bound to our”, meaning Black Americans, “freedom. They have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. We cannot walk alone.”
The “I Have A Dream” speech spoke to the territorial integrity of the United States. Martin mentioned by name, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi, and Louisiana, but also, California, Colorado, New York, New Hampshire and Pennsylvania.
The speech specifically denounced a doctrine of “social justice”. Martin unequivocally said, “In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.”
Terror induces three distinct responses – flee, immobility, or fight back. There is no place to which to flee. The United States is the last vestige of freedom, the last shining city on a hill. On the worldwide stage, the United States of America, has been the place to which to flee. A restored United States will have the power to reduce the terror in the hearts and minds of the others, concurrent with reducing the feeling of anxiety at home, because a strong United States has proven herself to be the defender, militarily, against despotism, the standard by which technological advancement has been measured whether describing everything from manufacturing to health care to space exploration and the political structure of government voluntarily adopted by every civilized nation on Earth.
The choice to remain immobile, or to pretend that we are not engaged in uncivil culture war, is false solace. Oprah, American Idol and Dancing with the Stars will suffer interruptions, on one’s internet connected smartphone you will not be allowed to order pizza, if federal regulators have their way.
Unless one prefers to die a slave on one’s knees than as a free citizen standing, there is no choice but to fight back.In this struggle we must remember that this is a war for territory in hearts and minds, not geographic territory, first and foremost. Fighting back will require more prayer than pistols, more persuasive argument than ammunition. As we struggle to restore the Republic, we must remember that in no small way the Founders constructed this nation to be guide by Judeo-Christian values, not a Progressive distortion of some mythical wall of separation that placed religious principles outside the wall and atheistic humanism inside with government. As Ronald Reagan is quoted as saying, “If we stop being a nation under God, we will be a nation gone under.”
When finally all of these requirements are put into place, then the bell of Liberty may ring renewed. When the bell of freedom is allowed to ring, it will ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city. In the words of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., unhyphenated-American hero, “All of God’s children, Black men and White men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, ‘Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we’re free at last!’ “