Do you think America can be saved by "working within the system?"
Do you think that electing a few "good men" will clean up the current system of government in Washington?
Do you think that the vipers and criminals and sociopaths and narcissists and pond scum and douchebags who run our massive, corrupt, out-of control government are going to let a few honest men or the "will of the People" or the Constitution screw up their good thing?
Do you think the "crisis" the Marxists are attempting to create in order to precipitate their Marxist revolution...can be used instead to destroy the existing Imperial State and restore the small, weak, limited Constitutional government we started with?
Why should crises only be fun for Marxists?
The Gunslinger
(E.O.T.I.S., Enemy of the Imperial State)
Joebama American citizens 2024 print
9 months ago
America can only be saved by Americans. Americans who don't behave like Americans... may be able to succeed against the current crew that we're fighting, but then Americans will still have to fight against that "New Boss" afterwards. And those of us remaining WILL.
ReplyDeleteNote: Behaving like Americans, doesn't mean mean behaving like prissy little goodie two shoes fops. Sam Adams was no shrinking violet.
And on the other hand, going back to my broken record, if there aren't enough Americans who understand what it means to be an American, what makes you think you wouldn't be overthrown next? Or in the case of 'americans' behaving like marxists, what if there are, and they overthrow you next?
"...douchebags who run our massive, corrupt, out-of control government are going to let a few honest men or the "will of the People" or the Constitution screw up their good thing?"
Of course not. Doesn't mean their choice has any power to determine our choices though. Take a look into England's "Glorious Revolution", they ejected a King, without a violent revolution, by people who declared that they refused to be forced to accept his religion and demanded their rights & he and his government fled the country.
Look at this summary and see if it doesn't read an awful lot like a realistically foreseeable future for us here, just substitute 'Socialize' for 'Catholicize', and "nominate and elect' for 'invite' :
"To a large extent, the Roman Catholic James II (1633-1701), King of Great Britain from 1685 until he fled to France in 1688, brought the "Glorious" revolution down upon himself. When he succeeded his brother Charles II on the English throne, he proceeded to alienate virtually every politically and militarily significant segment of English society by commencing ill-advised attempts to Catholicize the army and the government and to pack parliament with supporters. He employed the Dispensing Power — the royal prerogative of suspending the operation of various statutes, declared illegal in 1689 in the Bill of Rights — to evade the Act of Uniformity and the Test Act; and his Declaration of Indulgence, issued in 1687-88, suspended penal legislation against religious nonconformity, allowing Dissenters to worship in meeting houses, and Catholics to worship in private.
When, in June 1688, he had a son, fears of the establishment of a Catholic dynasty in England led prominent Protestant statesmen to invite William of Orange, James's son-in-law, to assume the throne. William landed with an army at Torbay in November 1688, promised to defend the liberty of England and the Protestant religion, and marched unopposed on London. James fled ignominiously to France. Parliament then met, denounced James, offered the throne to William and his wife Mary as joint sovereigns, and placed constitutionally significant legal and practical limitations on the monarchy..."
To skip the record again, if enough people don't understand what it means to be an American, and/or aren't willing to stand up for it... it's gone anyway. That was the issue Cicero faced and fell before, and what Octavian/Augustus realized as he 'transformed' the riven Roman Republic into a Principate with the carefully maintained trappings of the 'Republic'. Doesn't take a lot of imagination to see that happening either.
Bottom line is that it isn't just a matter of who is in control, but what ideas they believe, and whether or not the people understand and support those ideas. If those ideas aren't American Ideas... to hell with you all.
Thanks to government labor unions, government employees earn more in direct compensation and benefits than their counterparts in the private sector. I have heard any number of young people state their reason for joining the military is to put in the minimal time required and use that service for preferential treatment in receiving a government job. This entrenched, privileged and growing bureaucracy is going to do their utmost to protect that status, from supporting their chosen politicians to harassing their opponents. The idea of limited government is a direct threat to their job security, privileged status and ability to influence politicians.
ReplyDeleteThe media is comprised largely of want-to-be king makers and policy shapers. As most elitists view themselves, they are "above it all" and only do what they perceive is for the betterment of those that are not as gifted or perceptive as they. Naturally, they believe they will be the key advisors and voice of the people to those elitists elected to office. Their influence is directly proportional to the concentration of power they seek to influence.
Big business is a natural beneficiary of big government thanks to regulation that limits competition and raises the bar for entry by new competitors. Big business may claim that it merely wants uniform rules across the 50 states (or is it 57?) but what it really wants is a central authority to purchase and influence. Big labor is similarly motivated to bar competition or force rules on new companies that would remove wages from competitive pressure. Big business and big labor are natural allies of big government.
The division of the country into self-interest groups is capitulation by many to the idea that big government is the purveyor and benefactor of rights and privileges. Even the NRA, as posted in this blog, appears willing to sacrifice the rights of others to preserve their very narrow interests, as if the hooligans they strike the deal with are going stop.
The principle advocates of big government are parasites that live off the productivity of others. Their weapons are coercion, political correctness and support for like-minded politicans.
I agree with Van that any replacement may be just as bad if based on bad ideas, but I believe we have reached a critical point in our history that may be irreversible by ordinary means. We shall see very shortly whether or not the Tea Party candidates for Congress are sincere or fakers.
If however, the ballot box says that 50%+1 Americans want the totalitarian nanny state while 50%-1 do not, I see no choice but deliberate resistance. I'm not talking about violence, but I am talking about total non-cooperation, civil disobedience where appropriate and contempt for the illegal and unconstitutional laws of governemnt at every level. I'm talking about unconventional markets for goods and services to deprive government of control and revenue.
No one can predict what would take the place of what we have if what we have should fail, but if what we have is intolerable, then make it fail and deal with the replacement when the time comes. If our ideas are indeed in the minority view, we must either boldly confront the majority and force change, or bide by their will. This isn't a matter of forcing something on someone else they don't want, but of demanding that which is rightfully ours.