AMERICA IS IN THE THROES OF TYRANNY: WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT IT?
Updated on February 27, 2024
[QUOTATION]
“To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, we must consider what estate all men naturally live in, and that is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of Nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man.” ~From “The Second Treatise on Civil Government,” by John Locke, one of the Great Classical Philosophers, (born August 29, 1632, died October 28, 1704). The Framers of the U.S. Constitution studied the political-philosophical works of John Locke carefully and intensely. John Locke influenced America’s these First American Patriots, profoundly.
This is a follow-up to our previous article, posted in Ammoland Shooting Sports News, on February 20, 2024, and titled, “Is Armed Rebellion a Legal Right for Americans?”
Our Nation’s true Patriots, who cherish the right of the people to keep and bear arms against the incursion of tyranny, would view the question as rhetorical.
The Radical Left Obstructors and Destructors of our Free Republic would likely see the question as inane.
Regardless, the question is serious, of perennial significance, and deserving of our attention.
The question is not to be taken lightly and it is not to be taken as inane.
This is the principal question for us today. How one answers it has repercussions for our Country:
Exclaiming eternal life for our Republic or marking its date of expiration.
No less so for the Framers of our Constitution, this question was and is the ultimate, all-important question, ever insistent and demanding—not something to be deferred, or rebuffed.
It served as the focus of their work in creating a Nation, unlike the world had ever seen. The American people are and remain the sole sovereign over the Government.
Government Tyranny is a violation of a sacred trust between the people and the Government.
Tyranny amounts to the unlawful usurpation of the sovereignty of the authority of the American people over the Government. Such usurpation is inconsistent with the limited powers of the Government, established in the Articles of the Constitution.
Surely, the American people had the moral right to resist Tyranny—with force of arms if need be—if, as they found necessary, must be, and as it happened, at a singular moment in time in our history (and that of the world) came to be.
America’s Patriots made their moral argument plain by crafting their “Declaration of Independence” from Tyranny—a blatant affront to the legally constituted authority, the British Monarchy, to whom they owed allegiance, however begrudgingly they must give to it.
Our Nation’s Declaration of Independence” was directly influenced by the English Philosopher, John Locke. See, e.g., the article in Brittanica.
That sacred document provided the MORAL impetus for the American people to rebel against Tyranny, despite the Monarch’s legal authority to reign over them.
The Declaration of Independence is grounded on Natural, Eternal God-given Law.
The content of that Document IS NOT grounded on the Laws of Man nor is it a construction of Man’s artifices—Government.
These serve merely as convenient mechanisms that, wholly unlike the Divine Creator’s eternal, unconditional, and infallible Law and Truth, are themselves fallible, transitory, transient, and conditional.
Man has the MORAL RIGHT and the MORAL DUTY to resist Tyranny by all means necessary to secure the end of FREEDOM AND LIBERTY to which he is entitled under DIVINE LAW. That fact is plain.
BUT, do Americans have the “Legal Right” and obligation, apart from the “Moral Right” and Duty, to resist Tyranny? Americans did not have a legal right to rebel against the Tyranny of an unjust British Ruler—only the moral right to do so, knowing full well they would be hanged as traitors to “The Crown” if they failed in their endeavor.
So, then, in creating a new Government, one in which the American people would retain sovereignty over Government that THEY created, did the Founders of our Republic, the Framers of our Constitution, answer the question posed.
Did they provide the American people with the LEGAL RIGHT” and not, alone the MORAL RIGHT to rebel against a Tyranny imposed on them by their Government?
Is Armed Rebellion, then, a Legal Right for Americans, or not?
Some modern scholars say the Framers did answer this principal and insistent question they had posed for themselves.
These scholars claim they did so with a resounding, “no.”
Other modern scholars demonstrate hesitancy before volunteering their response, with either a “yes” or “no.”
We DO NOT respond “no” to the question, nor will a person sense any hesitancy in our voice.
We respond with a resounding, “yes,” and from our research, we argue the Founders of our Republic, the Framers of our Constitution, did so as well.
Both the “Legal Right” and the “Moral Right” are encapsulated in the Second Amendment of our Nation’s Bill of Rights of our Constitution.
How did the leading minds among America’s First Patriots hammer this out? What brought them to consider and to include our Nation’s Bill of Rights, one year after ratification of the Articles of the Constitution?
They began with the premise that “Freedom and Liberty” must be more than a fanciful desire, or desirous yet confoundingly difficult aim.
The manifestation of “FREEDOM AND LIBERTY” into REALITY was, for them, not merely an academic exercise—a mere Utopian dream—something to come to pass, at some point in the future, perhaps, but not during their time.
It was and is the quintessential foundation upon which a nascent Nation would come to fruition, else it ought not to come to be. They knew that if they did not construct a tenable basis for it, it never would come to be.
“Freedom and Liberty” are inconsistent with “Tyranny.” There is no common ground on this. It is one or the other—one cannot have a little of each.
Consider: Modern-day CCP China operates as a brutal Dictatorship. This is plain to all. Singapore is viewed as a “Benign” Dictatorship if one can allow for an oxymoron here.
The Governments of both, however, are EQUALLY Tyrannical: Not just a little bit in the case of one and not the other.
Just try expressing a contrary thought. Just try making a case for keeping and bearing arms in either Country and following through with your conviction. See what that gets you. See where that takes you.
The conundrum for America’s intellectual minds in hammering out a Constitution after the American Revolution involved first deciding whether this nascent Nation should suffer a strong, centralized “Federal” Government.
These learned men knew that Government—all Government—bears within it the seeds of Tyranny. Government is the Devil Incarnate. They harbored no illusion about that.
They had not long before pointed to the moral right of the American people to confront Tyranny head-on, as these men and many thousands more Patriots had fought and died to defeat Tyranny—not an easy task, and costly, in lives, not just in money, but wholly necessary.
These First Patriots sought to avoid Tyranny, like the plague, and fully intended to do so, if at all humanly possible, in this inchoate Nation.
The Framers of the Constitution determined, although for many decidedly reluctantly, that a Nation–—this fledgling Nation—needed a central Government, no less so than any other nation.
But that Government would carry within itself the seeds of Tyranny, no matter what they did to prevent such occurrence. They knew this. They did not doubt it. The best they could do is work some legerdemain within the Articles of the Constitution to forestall this, to hamper the rise of Tyranny. That is the inference that many academic scholars draw. But that inference implies the Government can install itself as a Tyranny, and do so legally in the absence of an effective legal remedy to counter it.
That idea conflicts with the notion the American people are sovereign over Government—a proposition many scholars reject, but that we take as axiomatic.
Since the Tyranny of Government could be, at best, forestalled, but never prevented, it behooves the people, the ultimate sole sovereign and final arbiter over Government, to be able to control a wayward Government as a parent must control a wayward brat of a child.
The insistent question for the Founders of our Republic, though, was how to conform the moral right of the “Declaration of Independence” into law, to protect a Free and Sovereign American people against the prospect of a Tyrannical Government that would invariably come to pass and that has come to pass with a vengeance today.
For, if no legal antecedent existed for countering Tyranny, then the Tyrant could claim before the fact, that rebellion against that Tyranny is never legally, i.e., constitutionally justified.
The Constitution they constructed—the Articles, alone—has not sufficed to protect the Common Man from the wiles of ruthless forces.
The Framers knew the Articles would provide, at best, a stopgap—nothing more.
So, the Framers feared Tyranny at some point would come to America—not merely could come to America. They would not be surprised that it has come to America, albeit it has taken two centuries for it to occur.
So, the legerdemain constructed (the Articles) did serve to forestall but not prevent the full poisonous “blossoming” of Tyranny’s manifestation apparent today.
That legerdemain points to the remarkable nature of the Government constructed—that they had forestalled full-fledged Tyranny for well over two centuries, from coming to fruition. But now Tyranny has come to America.
What is left for America to contend with this monster if the Electoral Process fails, as it did in the General Election of 2020 that saw the inception of a cardboard placeholder, Joe Biden, for a Tyrant lurking in the shadows?
The Common Man has something no other Nation on Earth has or ever had——A TRUE Bill of Rights—crafted and subsequently ratified by the States and incorporated into the Constitution a year after a majority of the States previously ratified the main body of the Constitution, the Articles. And it is effective. Consider the effort the Tyrant has expended to constrain it.
America is, today, under siege. It is in the throes of a renegade Federal Government—a weak, corrupt, demented, dementia-riddled, and aged fool, Joe Biden—controlled by a behemoth—hiding behind the curtain.
This grotesque travesty of a “U.S. President, and his Administration, are no more than puppets of shadowy, powerful, ruthless forces—an unelected Leviathan—orchestrating their every move—a secretive Tyrant.
The obsequious Biden Harlequin and Cabinet of malignant munchkins serve as the public face of the Tyrant.
The Tyrant expects, even wants its public face to look and act like the buffoons and dunces they are—making clear to the public and the world that U.S. greatness is on the wane. And, once the majesty of a once great Nation falls, so collapses all of Western Civilization, thereby paving the way for the construction of a new, tumultuous, decisively evil socio-political-economic paradigm.
The Tyrant utilizes the Federal Government as the principal mechanism for destroying the Country.
It has its wealthy well-connected backers and accomplices—an army, tens of thousands of them.
And it has tens of thousands more, friends, doing their part to bring about the downfall of our Nation.
The Tyrant’s backers, accomplices, and friends operate through all institutions: private, public, and quasi-public, permeating in and through the landscape of our Land.
And what of the public, the Hoi Polloi? Wherefore are the hundreds of millions of the Common People?
Many Americans are blind to the visible rape of their Country.
Many more Americans, bizarrely, seem content with the direction the Country is going through the machinations of the Tyrant’s puppet, the Biden regime, through its control of Media and Social Media, “Big Tech” and “Big Finance,” and all the myriad rest.
The American public—three hundred thirty-six million at last count, according to the U.S. Census—are buffeted hither and yon through propaganda.
But how many of THAT number represent the “Common Man”—the American citizenry? The Federation for American Immigration Reform (“FAIR”) says that, as of April 2022, there are 15.5 illegal aliens in America. That can’t be an accurate account.
The Pew Research Center said there were 11.1 million illegal aliens in the U.S. in 2009 and that number remained constant through 2011. Yet, since the Tyrant commanded the Biden puppet to open up the Nation’s Southern Border, 8 million more illegal aliens leapfrogged into the Country, and that figure comes from the Leftist Politifact.
Fox News, reposted by MSN News, citing CBC numbers, says 7.2 illegal aliens have entered the U.S. from 2021 through 2023, on the Biden puppet’s watch.
And Republicans point to Homeland Security data estimating another 1.7 “gotaways” have evaded capture since FY2021.
Conservatively, at least 21 million illegal aliens have now infested the U.S.
Recall that Donald Trump wanted to get a handle on this when he served as President. He rightfully sought to exclude illegal aliens as a segment to be utilized for congressional reapportionment [and to determine how many of these aliens reside in the U.S.]. See, e.g., an article in Brookings.
The Tyrant’s Biden puppet has deliberately callously, calculatedly, and illegally, facilitated the movement of millions of illegal aliens into the Country not only for Congressional reapportionment, but for destabilizing society and they are doing just.
These illegal aliens include murderous international criminal cartel members and international terrorists, apart from the vast multitude looking for handouts, costing the American taxpayer billions of dollars every year to subsidize these freeloaders. See, e.g., the articles in Newsweek and Forbes.
The Government, corporate leadership, and the billionaire class are on board with the takeover of our Country through the insertion of millions of unassimilable illegal aliens into the U.S. and European Countries, too. This creates volatility, hastening the dissolution of American and European culture, as it was designed to do.
The UN considers this “mobility” a force for good. That is the lie they sell. The UN has drafted numerous tracts and position papers about this.
The Tyrants controlling the EU and the U.S. have engendered the mass illegal movement of Third World populations into Western Civilization to destabilize society. That is the only reasonable inference to draw, as events bear out.
This is not by accident. It is by design.
Some Americans profess to be true believers in the dissolution of their Country. They are haplessly, helplessly, hopelessly delusional, and, more than likely, psychotic.
Many Americans are crass opportunists, hoping to obtain from the powerful usurpers of Government what they can to benefit themselves, the Country be damned.
Many more Americans simply see themselves as pragmatists. They see “the writing on the wall” for the Common Man and for such notions as ‘Freedom’ and ‘Liberty.’
The propagandists convey the message that “Freedom and Liberty” are, best, quaint, whimsical, charming anachronisms and archaisms of a bygone era—vacuous, meaningless, and, at worst, dangerous ideas, not synchronous with the dogmas thrust on the people: “DIVERSITY EQUITY, INCLUSION” (DEI); and “ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, and GOVERNANCE (ESG); and “CRITICAL RACE THEORY” (CRT)—all artificial constructs of the RADICAL LEFT in service to the TYRANT.
These people, who have capitulated to the Tyrant, wish to protect their life, their monetary fortunes, and their fortunate lifestyle. These people have learned to spew the platitudes expected of them or, if not of a bent to do so, they mind their manners, having the good sense to keep their mouths shut lest they incur the ire of the Tyrant and his minions—the target of Government harassment.
That leaves America’s many Patriots. And what do we have other than THAT Freedom and Liberty, our fundamental, eternal, natural law rights, vouchsafed him by the Good Lord Above through the codification of a singular set of mandates in our Nation’s Bill of Rights?
And, of course, the new-era Communists and Marxists of the day—trying to sound “hip” and “cool” and “sharp” and very, very American—cast aspersions on the concept of “Natural Law” through the use of simplistic claptrap and ludicrous flummery.
Politico national investigative correspondent Heidi Przybyla, slams Christians, driving home a false dichotomy between Christians and “Christian Nationalists” (the latter a made-up phrase).
Two MSNBC commentators listen raptly to this Priestess of the new Dogma, hanging onto her every silvery-tongued word—apostles of the new Enlightenment.
Heidi Przybyla wears an imbecilic smile spinning her yarn. In cloying, condescending, pedantic fashion she quietly chides that segment of the American public that fails to recognize what she strives to convey as a simple, self-evident fact: that [fundamental] rights do not come from God, but from Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Really? That is what she says plainly, succinctly, categorically.
The Founders of our Republic would take Przybyla to task for such a puzzling, presumptuous, contemptuous remark. See the Fox News article.
The implication derived from Przybyla’s absurd polemic is that “God does not exist”—and that it would be better for everyone to disencumber him or herself of that idea.
This reduces morality to a relative, transient, vacuous, everchanging concept, and that of course is the point of her nonsensical, simplistic argument.
If there are no Natural Law Rights and that, if whatever Rights exist are those dictated by the Tyrant—bestowed on a person at whim and rescinded at whim, created at whim, and abrogated by the Tyrant at whim—then a person has no recourse but to look at the Tyrant as “God.” “Freedom and Liberty” have no place in a Tyranny. They can have no place in a Tyranny. Anyway, that is the takeaway from Przybyla’s little speech to the public.
Still, “Freedom and Liberty”—the predicate basis for the sanctity and inviolability of the individual—are cherished by many of us, nonetheless, just as they were cherished by America’s First Patriots, and notwithstanding that, they are routinely and viciously ignored, scorned by, or found incomprehensible to many other Americans—victims of endless, repetitious, hypnotic psychological conditioning by the minions of the Tyrant.
Yet it remains: Freedom and Liberty are bequeathed to the Common Man. These concepts persist in the Soul of Man despite the efforts to eliminate them from conscious memory.
Most Americans know this singular Truth even if most of humanity does not and even if many Americans do not, assuming if they give the matter any thought at all.
We Americans who do know the truth, who are not prone to bury that Truth, who are not taken in by the propaganda, know we are unique—outliers—whom the Tyrant sees as profane untouchables because we do not fall prey to the nonsense he projects through his seditious Press and seditious social media.
We do not substitute our NATURAL LAW RIGHTS for international norms and global doctrinal “morality,” modern mythmaking, and hastily constructed Government Gospel that find abhorrent such a seeming archaic, obsolescent concept as NATURAL LAW RIGHTS, and, so, try to insert a counterfeit and logically weak substitute, “MAN-MADE RIGHTS” as a catchall for all RIGHTS.
If Rights are merely gratuitous offerings of the Government, then the populace has no recourse if that Government rescinds or modifies any Rights at whim. The Tyrant sees the “Common Man” as a visible threat if that Common Man refuses to accept the Tyrant as the ultimate and sole authority and power over him.
The Tyrant doesn’t even like the expression “Common Man.” For that expression itself conveys the idea of a power and authority over Tyranny not so easily cast aside.
The Tyrant and his minions refer to THIS Common Man in pejorative terms. They project the erroneous idea the Common Man is obstinate, obtuse, not a free-thinking, rational American citizen to be respected.
The Tyrant refers to the Common Man as a “MAGA Republican,” a “Christian Nationalist,” and as a “Right-wing Conservative.”
Such phrases are meant to serve as insulting epithets no less so than other plainly obvious demeaning phrases like “White Supremacist,” “Racist,” “Fascist,” “Nazi,” “Trumpster,” “Xenophobe,” “Islamophobe,” “Misogynist,” and so forth.
The Tyrant, through his propagandists, has devised and implemented these expressions to serve his purpose: to drive a wedge between and among Americans, to prevent them from perceiving the true threat to their well-being and to prevent them from organizing effectively, to topple the Tyrant usurper.
The Tyrant depends on millions—perhaps tens of millions of Americans—to serve it, whether knowingly or not. The Despot depends on this. It needs, must have the support of these tens of millions of Americans if it is to succeed in subjugating all Americans.
So then, do we throw ourselves, this Common Man, a Sovereign People, along with our Free Constitutional Republic under the bus, and into the dustbin of history?
Do we throw the Common Man’s heritage away because it doesn’t meet with the Tyrant’s approval and because the Common Man’s heritage does not cohere with the expectations of the current and everchanging fads thrust on the public by this Tyrant who is disposed to use powers of mass suggestion to cajole and shame the public en masse into submission, subjugation?
How have we come to this?
Has not this Country its Declaration of Independence? Whither that Document now? Is it tucked away in some obscure museum drawer, or left, unnoticed, uncared for on some table to gather dust?
Is not our Federal Government one of circumscribed powers and authority, assiduously demarcated among three co-equal Branches?
Does our Country not operate by the doctrines of checks and balances and Federalism?
Do we not have a well-developed body of Supreme Court jurisprudence and centuries of Congressional Statutes.
And, most importantly, are Americans expected to forget that they are the only Nation on Earth that has an incomparable Bill of Rights, a true set of fundamental, unalienable natural law rights and liberties, situated smack dab in the United States Constitution—a Bill of Rights beyond which Government cannot lawfully tamper or toy with because these Rights are not created by Government of men, as these Rights existed before Government of men and, therefore, cannot be ignored, modified, abrogated, bestowed upon or rescinded by any Government because they are not the product of Government but, rather, are the product of a Loving Divine Creator who placed them on Man and in Man’s very Soul?
Yet, notwithstanding all of this, Americans face the destruction of their Country as an independent, sovereign Nation-State and the only truly free Constitutional Republic in the world today.
What can be done to turn the tide?
The Electorate has one shot left. The Electorate can elect one man who has proved to be an outlier himself—who refuses to bow low to the Tyrant. That person is Donald Trump.
This man is prosecuted, persecuted, and vilified to no end.
His one heinous “crime?”
He has sought to safeguard our Nation’s history, heritage, culture, National identity, National ethos, National Security, and Judeo-Christian ethic—and, above all else—our sacred Rights and Liberties. And during his first Term—and, to date, only Term of Office—as machinations of the Electoral Process in the 2020 General Election denied him his rightful Second Term—he did bring Americans back to their historical roots. That was his unforgivable crime in the eyes of the ruthless forces that crush.
They were determined to displace him and replace him, for Trump was ruining their agenda. His predecessors had willingly conceded power and authority to the Tyrant, and America had been brought low. Trump rebuilt America from the ground up. This was as the Electorate wanted.
Most of the Electorate sought to preserve its Free Constitutional Republic. The Tyrant would have none of that.
The Electorate’s aims are inconsistent with the work of the Tyrant. Donald Trump had served the Electorate, consistent with the dictates of the U.S. Constitution. And for that he was and is crucified: professionally, financially, personally.
That is how the Tyrant treats our 45th President and, this, by extension, is how the Tyrant treats all Americans.
The American public has thrown that back in the face of the Tyrant and his minions.
FOUR HISTORIC MAMMOTH WINS IN REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES TO DATE AND FOUR HISTORIC LUDICROUS INDICTMENTS.
The WINS cannot be denied.
The INDICTMENTS are LEGALLY FALLACIOUS, an APOSTASY on our SYSTEM of LAWS and JURISPRUDENCE. The Attorney class knows this as practitioners of the art. The Lay Public knows this intuitively. Neither one is amused at the defilement of our judicial system by individuals lacking integrity, who have offered their services to the Tyrant.
Lamely, the Tyrant keeps its OPPORTUNISTIC WIND-UP TOY, called a Nikki Haley, robotically clinking and clanking, making unintelligible, meaningless, garbled noises through its yap.
Now some would deny that America has a Tyrant or that America is in the throes of Tyranny, except to deflect those expressions ‘Tyrant’ and ‘Tyranny’ to Trump, which is patently ridiculous.
But the Tyrant and Tyranny do exist in America—yet not from Trump or any act on his part.
Of late, some news reporters and commentators who have a backbone, have vocalized what the Electorate knows.
They are calling out the Biden Administration’s crimes and have used the word, Tyranny to describe the dissolution of our Republic.
Trump, himself, has recently, and correctly, stated, during his recent speech at CPAC, as reported by the British newspaper, The Guardian,
“A vote for Trump is your ticket back to freedom, it’s your passport out of tyranny and it’s your only escape from Joe Biden and his gang’s fast track to hell.”
Is there any doubt of the Tyrant’s existence? The effects are transparent and copious, severe and insistent, undeniable and irremediable, and becoming further entrenched with each passing day.
The Tyrant has at its disposal 1.4 million armed personnel: the standing army (0.4% of the population). See “macro trends.”
To offset that the armed citizenry comprises 46% of the population, as of June 2018, per one estimate. See the article in “The Trace.”
Do you see the problem for the Tyrant? Do you see why the Despot is fearful, frantic— indefatigably intent on disarming the public—the Common Man?
The Tyrant assumes it will defeat Trump one way or another, lest he turns the Country around once again, securing America for Americans, preserving our Republic and our Fundamental Rights and Liberties.
The Tyrant has let loose the Dogs of War against Trump. Whether the Tyrant succeeds in his endeavor remains to be seen. It appears the Tyrant is losing despite his best effort and formidable powers. But whatever prevails, the Tyrant must still contend with the armed citizenry.
A powerful armed citizenry takes serious exception to the Tyrant’s actions against Trump and against that armed citizenry.
The armed citizenry is not willing to accept another instance of illegal manipulation of the Nation’s electoral system, the unprecedented unlawful machinations of the Nation’s legal system, the illegal attempt to confiscate the citizens’ weaponry.
In that regard, are the Nation’s sacred Documents on the Common Man’s side? Let’s delve into this.
The “Declaration of Independence” is a cherished document, to be sure.
But that Document is not “law” and it is not a component of the Constitution.
It provides a plain, flawless moral impetus for the Common Man to revolt against tyranny. But it does not provide legal “cover” for him to do so.
One might well ask, why, oh why, did not the founders of our Republic not incorporate the Declaration of Independence into the Constitution?
Did they debate this? Only snippets, here and there exist.
Take a closer look at the Constitution.
The Constitution does provide a legal mechanism to counter Tyranny: The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.
The Second Amendment is the Founder’s legal application of the Moral Argument of Natural Law asserting the Common Man Need Not Suffer Tyranny of Government.
So, the Second Amendment does operate, arguably, as the embodiment of the Nation’s Declaration of Independence, codified in in the Constitution. The Second Amendment serves a dual purpose.
It sanctifies, in writing, the preeminent Moral God-given Natural Law Mandate, doing so in the framework of Constitutional Law. So, the “Declaration of Independence” did make its way into the Constitution, after all, albeit subtly—too subtly—for an obtuse Congress to take note.
Congress protects even secures the legality of outright Government Tyranny through Congressional Statute: 18 USCS § 2383.
But what, then, are Americans to make of this Congressional Statute 18 USCS § 2383 – Rebellion and Insurrection? The Statute says plainly and clearly that it is a crime for a citizen to incite rebellion or insurrection against the Federal Government, regardless of the nature of that Government, be it beneficial, benign, or Tyrannical. There is nothing subtle about that.
Congress doesn’t draw a distinction between a Government that adheres to the dictates of the U.S. Constitution and one that operates in defiance to that Constitution. It has led to unabashed, unrepentant Tyranny.
Consider the actions of Joe Biden. He not only ignores U.S. Supreme Court rulings. He openly mocks the Court. To its face, he gloats. He does whatever he wants (or more to the point, he, as a mouthpiece for the actual Dictator behind the scenes, does what the secret Tyrant orders him and his administration to do).
He obediently follows the orders of the Tyrant, as commanded of him, not that of the Constitution. The aim is to inform the public, that a Free Republic and the sovereignty of the American people over Government has come to an end.
“Democracy” at play is apparently newspeak for “Tyranny” in action.
And, keep in mind the aforesaid Statute, 18 USCS § 2383, is a creature of Congress—a Congress that, itself, has run amok.
It is the creation of a Federal Government, protecting that Government at all costs—protecting Tyranny. 18 USCS § 2383 is not a statute the Founders of our Republic would look kindly upon.
And understand, 18 USCS § 2383, as a Congressional Statute, is not to be mistaken as in or of the Constitution. But does that matter? Does it have to be in there? In some sense it is.
Clause 2 of Article VI (the “Supremacy Clause”) says the Federal Constitution and Federal Statute take precedence over State Law and State Constitution:
“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
But what if the Second Amendment conflicts with Federal Statute, 18 USCS § 2383.
Article VI does not say which of the two take precedence, where the two conflict? The U.S. Supreme Court has not dealt with this issue. No case or controversy has arisen to allow the Court to consider the matter.
Yet, when Americans look at the damage done to the Second Amendment, they observe that, in effect, practically all Statutes in force today impacting the Second Amendment and all Government Rules, Regulations, and Executive Branch Edicts emanating from the Biden Administration directed to the Second Amendment, do infringe the core of the Second Amendment.
Through time, in the absence of judicial action or public wrath, these unconstitutional utterings, have the patina of authority and legality.
This has led Justice Clarence Thomas to assert, bitterly, that the Second Amendment is treated like a Second-Class Right.
We see this happening all the time, don’t we?
And there is a tacit, albeit erroneous presumption that Federal Statute and Bureaucratic rules and Executive Branch edicts are compatible with the Second Amendment even though they are not, and even if not that they override the Second Amendment anyway.
A flash point isn’t just on the horizon: It’s here! It’s a long time coming. But the evil of Government has grown more pronounced, as its illegal actions have become ever more brazen, audacious and outlandish over time. This brashness hasn’t happened overnight. It has taken years, even decades.
The public’s increasing reticence or induced somnolence, coupled to, by turns, a recalcitrant, blundering, and submissive Congress has allowed this to happen.
18 USCS § 2383 is a tacit assertion of the lawfulness of Government Tyranny, outlawing rebellion or insurrection against that Tyranny.
18 USCS § 2383 is a tacit assertion of the legality of Government Tyranny, outlawing rebellion or insurrection against that Tyranny.
The Second Amendment exists to counter Tyranny. The language of it is at odds with 18 USCS § 2383, which exists to protect Tyranny.
The two cannot be reconciled, and Article VI doesn’t help to clarify the matter. It is altogether mum, allowing for a naked contradiction to preside in the Constitution.
The Press wishes to avoid the discussion of whether the Second Amendment allows for or specifically prescribes or proscribes the Common Man’s duty to counter Tyranny of Government. But one time, not that long ago, the Press did discuss it.
Progressive Democrat Representative of Maryland, Jamie Raskin, published an article on September 27, 2022, in The New York Times, titled, “The Second Amendment Gives no Comfort to Insurrectionists.”
This article came, not accidentally, on the heels of the January 6, 2021 incident at the U.S. Capitol Building, but was, in fact, the impetus that spurred Raskin to write his article.
He sought to finally lay to rest the idea, as he and others of his ilk believe, that Americans have a right to resist the Government, even if that Government is Tyrannical.
In his Op-Ed, Raskin writes, in pertinent part,
If the American government were to engage in true tyranny — like slaughtering and oppressing the population — we the people would undoubtedly have a right to recite our grievances, proclaim our cause to the world, cut the ties that bind and engage in the kind of revolutionary struggle that the American colonists did. But it would be meaningless and silly to argue that it is the Constitution that granted us the right to do all that.
As the historian Garry Wills long ago explained: ‘A people can overthrow a government it considers unjust. But it is absurd to think that it does so by virtue of that unjust government’s own authority. The appeal to heaven is an appeal away from the earthly authority of the moment, not to that authority.’
Let these remarks sink in for a moment.
Raskin takes the position, promulgated by a similar Political Progressive, Garry Wills, whom he cites for support, that the Second Amendment i.e., the “right of the people to keep and bear arms,” does not provide a legal mechanism for the public to overthrow a Tyrant, no matter how despicable the actions of that Tyrant.
Raskin cites his comrade, Wills, to support a theory that our Federal Government IS to be trusted, that our Federal Government IS, then, a good thing—this, despite all evidence to the contrary, and that our Federal Government sometimes demands constraints on liberty, for the good of man.
So, whence the distortion in the American Patriot’s perception toward the import of the Second Amendment? Wills and Raskin argue the distortion, the fear of Government, rests upon “a distortion” they lay at the feet of the Antifederalists among the Framers of the Constitution.
But, Raskin omits recitation of the central thesis of Wills’ book where the logical faultiness becomes glaringly apparent.
Wills says,
The historical and Constitutional evidence used in these debates is largely bogus. But that raises another question. Whence comes this determination to distort the history of the legal system. The distortion began very early, when the arguments of the Antifederalists against the Constitution were said only a decade or so after that document’s ratification embodied in the Constitution. People could stay loyal to the Constitution only if they felt it was structurally disloyal to itself.
This is an idea presented by several academic scholars. They argue, like Wills, that the Bill of Rights—especially the Second Amendment—cannot mean what it says because the Founders could not have intended for the American people to take up arms against the Constitution.
Such an idea for Wills is abhorrent and logically inconsistent with the import of the Constitution.
But this misses the mark and is, on reflection logically incoherent.
The Antifederalists didn’t intend for the Bill of Rights to serve as a means to defeat the Constitution, but, rather, to preserve it.
The Antifederalists directed their concern to the Tyranny of Government that they saw required a specific mechanism for correction. The armed citizenry is the only solution to a worst-case scenario.
Wills and Raskin not only disagree with this idea but see the Second Amendment as an anathema if it does mean what it says.
Wills avoids discussing Tyranny. He dismisses, impliedly, that such a thing is possible.
Raskin, at least admits the possibility of it, but argues the citizenry is legally prohibited from doing anything about it, regardless of the moral imperative for doing so.
So, Tyranny is okay for Raskin. But then, Raskin contradicts his own conclusion because he—along with so many other Progressives in Congress—argue that Trump was a Tyrant and that it was up to Congress itself to do something about it—intentionally misusing the Impeachment Clause and ultimately manipulating, the Electoral System, unethically and unlawfully, to defeat him.
The Radical Left never expresses any concern over the internal contradictions inherent in its positions, as long as the public does not take notice of them, and then ignores the public’s protestations.
And if the public persists, the Radical Left mercilessly attacks that public for pointing out the internal contradictions inherent in the Radical Left’s logic.
Wills, though, as an academician, abhors the idea of incoherence and inconsistency in his positions. For him and for other scholars amenable to his theories, he denies the U.S. Government can logically or legally ever be considered Tyrannical if that is to suggest the American people have a legal right to actively oppose it.
But he must go through a series of convoluted gyrations to make this idea plausible.
He does this by denying the existence of tension between Government and Liberty. He denies the existence of a “zero-sum” game.
Wills denies the idea of TYRANNY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT by arguing that LIBERTY is not an absolute.
He refuses, then, to accept that constraints on Liberty entail Tyranny.
But, if that were true, then the Antifederalists would not have thought it prudent to insist on a written Bill of Rights, specifically pointing to a need for a citizen army to thwart Tyranny when it arises. The need for it proved a prescient warning of Tyranny to come.
Wills cannot rationally dismiss the Bill of Rights out of hand. He therefore argues that the Framers of the Constitution intended to give to Government the power to constrain the right of the people to keep and bear arms through Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.
The first part of Clause 1 says, “Congress shall have the power . . .” and Clause 16, adds,
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.
Garry Wills takes the position that Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16, was designed by the Framers to outmaneuver the import of the Second Amendment. But then, is the Second Amendment to be given no efficacy?
The late eminent Justice Antonin Scalia, who penned the Majority Heller Opinion would find this logically dubious, legally incoherent, and ethically repugnant. In a word, ‘ludicrous.’
So, then, what is the import of the Clause 16?
The non-obligatory word ‘may’ in the Clause is a limitation on Congress. Congress does not have the authority to compel service of militias to serve the Government’s ends, most notably if the Government becomes a Tyranny.
Congress does not have the authority to compel service of militias to serve a Tyrannical Government. Otherwise a Tyrant would have the legal authority to negate the Second Amendment imperative by conscripting all militias or, in the absence of militias, simply disarming the citizenry, not an easy task by any means, but lawfully permissible to try.
The Heller case made clear that the Government cannot lawfully entrench its tyranny by simply disarming the public.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16 points to a need to protect the Country from EXTERNAL threats, nothing more. The Second Amendment, on the other hand, exists to protect the American people from the INTERNAL threat posed by a Tyrannical Government that seeks to harm the citizenry.
Wills elides over the codification of the NATURAL LAW RIGHT to armed self-defense against predatory animal, predatory man, and predatory government. We, however, do not.
Since a Government’s natural inclination is toward tyranny, the armed citizenry’s function is to rein in the effectuation of that tendency so that Tyranny can never become permanent.
The people distrust a powerful Federal Government and with good reason, precisely because such a Government’s natural inclination is to rein in Americans’ Fundamental Rights and Liberties—especially that right—enshrined in the Constitution that exists to “rein in” the Tyranny of Government.
And the Tyrant, for his part, fears the armed citizenry. If left to its devices, that Tyrant would bring the entire weight of Government to bear against the armed citizenry. We need not guess at this. We see it now. The Tyrant intends to disarm Americans. We see this happening every day.
At the moment the Biden puppet and his minions are using unlawful Executive Edict and unlawful Rules-making authority of the Bureaucratic Deep-State to curb the exercise of the natural law right to armed self-defense against Tyranny. Several Marxist States are crafting their own laws, rules, and edicts in violation of Constitutional constraints against infringement of the Second Amendment.
The Right of the people to keep and bear arms is the ultimate failsafe to ensure that Tyranny will never succeed.
The people distrust a powerful Federal Government and with good reason, precisely because such a Government’s natural inclination is to rein in Americans’ Fundamental Rights and Liberties—especially that right—enshrined in the Constitution that exists to “rein in” the Tyranny of Government.
And the Tyrant, for his part, fears the armed citizenry. If left to its devices, that Tyrant would bring the entire weight of Government to bear against the armed citizenry. We need not guess at this. We see it now. The Tyrant intends to disarm Americans. We see this happening every day.
At the moment the Biden puppet and his minions are using unlawful Executive Edict and unlawful Rules-making authority of the Bureaucratic Deep-State to curb the exercise of the natural law right to armed self-defense against Tyranny. Several Marxist States are crafting their own laws, rules, and edicts in violation of Constitutional constraints against infringement of the Second Amendment.
Eventually, if left to its devices, this puppet of the Tyrant will suspend all Rights and Liberties by invoking martial law.
How well do you suppose that will go? _________________________________________________