MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Declaration Of Independence’

Lincoln’s Repudiation of the Declaration of Independence

Posted by M. C. on July 5, 2022

By Thomas DiLorenzo

Perhaps the biggest falsehood ever pedaled about Abraham Lincoln is that he was devoted to the principles of the Declaration of Independence.  Exactly the opposite is true; he repudiated every one of the main principles of the Declaration with his words and, more importantly, his actions.  In our time the odd and ahistorical writings of Harry Jaffa and his “Straussian” cult followers have been the primary means of spreading this enormous falsehood.  (Jaffa was neither a historian nor a philosopher but a supposed expert in “rhetoric” who spent his career writing books instructing Americans about the allegedly “real meaning” of historical documents in writings that were often either void of historical facts or flatly contradicted by them).

Contrary to what every American is taught beginning with elementary school (or sooner), Lincoln did not believe that all men are created equal.  He repeatedly denied this for his entire adult life, even announcing during one of the Lincoln/Douglas debates that “I as much as any man want the superior position” to belong to the white race.  He was proud to be a white supremacist’s white supremacist. “Before, after, and during the Lincoln-Douglas debates, in public and in private, Lincoln used the N-word,” wrote Lerone Bennett, Jr. in Forced into Glory: Abraham Lincoln’s White Dream, p. 97.

While in the Illinois legislature Lincoln supported the Illinois black codes which deprived free blacks of citizenship.  He supported the 1848 amendment to the Illinois constitution that forbade blacks from emigrating into the state.  He was the “manager” of the Illinois Colonization Society that used tax dollars to deport the small number of free blacks that lived in the state.  Until his dying day he plotted to deport all the black people out of America (See Colonization after Emancipation by Philip Magness and Sebastian Page).

Lincoln invented a bizarre new theory of the American founding to “justify” his destruction of the voluntary union of the founding fathers that was initiated by the Declaration of Independence – their declaration of secession from the British empire.  As summarized by legal/constitutional scholar James Ostrowski, Lincoln’s absurd theory was that:

  • No state may ever secede from the union for any reason.
  • If any state secedes, the federal government shall invade such state with sufficient military force to suppress the secession.
  • The federal government may require all states to raise militias to suppress the secession of their sister states.
  • After suppressing secession the federal government may rule by martial law until such time as the state(s) accepts federal supremacy.
  • The federal government may force the states to adopt new state constitutions imposed on them at gunpoint by military authorities.
  • The president may, on his own authority and without consulting any other branch of government, suspend the Bill of Rights and the writ of habeas corpus.

No state would ever have ratified the Constitution if this – Lincoln’s ridiculous and tyrannical new theory – is what the citizens of the states thought the Constitution said.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

A Republic, Not a Democracy

Posted by M. C. on December 19, 2021

The design of our constitutional republic, for better or worse, was to protect individual liberties and private property by limiting the power of government. That’s why leftists hate it.

by Scott McPherson

Late-night political hack and former comedian Stephen Colbert doesn’t usually warrant any notice, but he stumbled onto an important truth recently. Lamenting the possibility that the Supreme Court may overturn Roe v. Wade, he whined that if only 27 percent of Americans (according to a Washington Post/ABC News poll) support such a move, and the court doesn’t vote the way he and a majority of Americans prefer, “We don’t live in a democracy.”Democracy or a republic? I say: Let’s restore our founding system — a republic — to our land. That would be something to celebrate.
[Click to Tweet]

But we weren’t supposed to live in a democracy. We were supposed to live in a republic.

A story, probably apocryphal, is told that upon exiting the Pennsylvania statehouse at the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Ben Franklin was approached by a passerby. “What have you given us,” the woman asked him. “A republic, if you can keep it,” he replied. While the word “republic” to a Democrat is like a cross to a vampire, it is unquestionably the type of government the Founders created in our Constitution. The design of our constitutional republic, for better or worse, was to protect individual liberties and private property by limiting the power of government. That’s why leftists hate it.

The word “democracy” does not even appear in the Constitution, nor does it appear in that document’s philosophical antecedent, the Declaration of Independence, which stated boldly the revolutionary idea that everyone is “endowed” with unalienable rights – to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This assertion upended the idea that individuals were mere “subjects” beholden to their betters, cogs in a machine worthy of consideration only insofar as they served the purposes of the elite. The Framers wanted regular elections, but that was simply a peaceful means to eject recalcitrant politicians acting against the interests of the people.

Anti-democratic mechanisms were consciously built into the Constitution. Inspired by an eighteenth-century French political philosopher named Baron de Montesquieu, a system of checks and balances was established. The executive, legislative, and judicial branches were created, each with the ability to stymie the others. Members of the U.S. House of Representatives, elected directly by the people, could pass legislation, but it could die in the Senate; a bill passed through both chambers faces a potential veto from the president, chosen via an Electoral College, not popular vote, and a super majority is required to override that veto. Finally, despite overwhelming support, courts can strike down any law that violates the Constitution.

Interestingly, in a recent report that could easily have been written by a member of the Democratic Party, the Chinese Foreign Ministry specifically highlighted this as proof of our system’s alleged failure. It read in part, “The U.S. political system has far too many checks and balances, raising the cost of collective action and in some cases making it impossible altogether. . . . There is an entrenched political paralysis in the U.S.” [Emphasis added]

This analysis, meant as a criticism, is actually very revealing. Afterall, when Communists are upset about something, it’s likely good for individual freedom! Leftists get misty-eyed when talking about “democracy,” claiming they simply want to “empower” the “common people,” but the truth is they despise voters and are happy with the electoral process only when things go their way. Witness their reaction to the recent election in Virginia, which leftwing commentators denounced as “racist” – despite the victory of a female black immigrant (!) in her run for lieutenant governor. The long-serving president of the state senate in New Jersey was defeated by a truck driver, in his first bid for public office. The left-wing Atlantic smeared his victory as “populist moonshine.” Arch-“progressive” Hillary Clinton claims – oblivious to the irony – that a Trump victory in the 2024 election will spell  “the end of our democracy.”

The Framers wanted it to be difficult to pass laws. They also wanted the sphere in which government acted to be quite small, enumerating the limited powers of Congress in Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution. Further protections are found in the Bill of Rights—the 10 amendments to the Constitution forbidding government from infringing the rights of Americans -– even with majority approval. For example, the First Amendment shields unpopular speech from criminal prosecution – no matter what; the Sixth Amendment guarantees that a criminal defendant will be tried by an impartial jury – not by popular opinion or by vengeful government officials; the Eighth Amendment protects the worst offender against “cruel and unusual punishment,” even if the mob wants his head on a pike.

Democracy or a republic? I say: Let’s restore our founding system — a republic — to our land. That would be something to celebrate.

This post was written by: Scott McPherson

Scott McPherson is a policy adviser at the Future of Freedom Foundation, and author of Freedom and Security: The Second Amendment and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms. An advocate of the Free State Project, he lives in Portsmouth, New Hampshire.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : Equality in Slavery

Posted by M. C. on August 10, 2021

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/august/09/equality-in-slavery/

Written by Ron Paul Monday August 9, 2021
undefined

The Senate Armed Services Committee approved last month a National Defense Authorization Act that includes a requirement that women register with Selective Service on their 18th birthday. If the bill becomes law with this provision included and a military draft is reinstated, women will be forced to join the military, and America will have equality in slavery.

Proponents of drafting women argue that since women can now serve in combat it makes sense to make the draft “gender neutral.”

Some conservatives have made moral arguments against drafting women, saying that women should be able to decide for themselves whether or not to serve in the military. It is certainly true that it is immoral to force women into military service, but that is because it is wrong to force anyone into military service.

Forcing young people, regardless of their sex, to fight, kill, and even die in war is the worst violation of individual liberty a government can commit. Those who support the military draft implicitly reject the Declaration of Independence. How can someone support forced military service and still claim to believe all individuals are endowed with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

While commonly thought of as a “left-wing” position, opposition to the draft has historically united Americans across the political spectrum. Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater both opposed the draft while running for president. Russell Kirk, the scholar who helped popularize the term “conservative,” opposed conscription.

Some progressives oppose a military draft but support other forms of mandatory national service. These progressives fail to understand that forcing someone to serve the welfare state is just as immoral as forcing someone to serve the warfare state.

Some conservatives join progressives in supporting mandatory national service. These conservatives claim that mandatory national service provides young people a way to “pay back” the debt they owe society. But these are moral obligations owed to families, churches, and communities, not legal obligations owed to, and properly enforceable by, the government.

Libertarians are consistent opponents of all forms of mandatory service. This is because libertarians apply the prohibitions against violence, theft, and fraud to governments as well as private citizens. So, if it is wrong for your neighbors to force your children to mow the neighbors’ lawn, it is wrong for government to force your children to serve in the military or perform any other type of “national service.”

The nonaggression principle is why libertarians oppose taxation, nationalized healthcare and education, and military crusades in the name of “democracy” or “human rights.” It is also why libertarians oppose laws telling people how to raise their children, limiting access to “extremist” websites, telling business owners who can and cannot use what bathrooms on their property, or prohibiting someone from gambling online, smoking marijuana, or drinking raw milk.

Some libertarians urge their liberty movement compatriots to not talk about the nonaggression principle. These “pragmatists” think the focus should be on making the “practical” case for liberty. But those who embrace liberty because it “works” better than statism will make “exceptions” if they think an authoritarian idea like mandatory national service is a more practical way of achieving their political, economic, or social goals. Only those committed to the moral case for liberty can be counted on to defend all liberty at all times.


Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.

Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Was the American Revolution a Mistake? – The Daily Reckoning

Posted by M. C. on July 6, 2020

That the largest signature on the Declaration of Independence was signed by the richest smuggler in North America was no coincidence. He was hopping mad. Parliament in 1773 had cut the tax on tea imported by the British East India Co., so the cost of British tea went lower than the smugglers’ cost on non-British tea.

https://dailyreckoning.com/was-the-american-revolution-a-mistake-2/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Right To Work and the Betrayal by Lockdowns – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on May 20, 2020

It’s madness to think that putting millions out of work can stop an epidemic, especially one that’s already well underway. Its madness and ignorance to think this can be done without causing a great many more deaths by other follow-on effects of the lockdowns.

In sum, all people, including Americans, have a right to work, a natural right. It follows from the basic rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And following from the right to work are rights of travel over means paid for by taxpayers, who largely work and also use those means for other ends.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/05/michael-s-rozeff/right-to-work-and-the-betrayal-by-lockdowns/

By

The right to work in this blog is not the phrase as used for union issues. It’s the natural right. For us human beings, work means “Such effort or activity by which one makes a living; employment.” Your right to work means that at your voluntary option you may make employment exchanges or bargains with other people with similar liberty; and at the same time people external to the bargaining parties, i.e., other than you and the people you are exchanging with, may not coerce either of you to prevent, change or modify the work arrangement.

Right to work doesn’t mean that anyone owes you any stuff like this: “…technical and vocational guidance and training programmes, policies and techniques to achieve steady economic, social and cultural development and full and productive employment under conditions safeguarding fundamental political and economic freedoms to the individual.” Nor do you owe anyone an affirmative action or non-discrimination aspect of your bargain.

Obviously, labor laws in the U.S. prevent you from exercising your right to work fully and freely. “The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) administers and enforces more than 180 federal laws. These mandates and the regulations that implement them cover many workplace activities for about 150 million workers and 10 million workplaces.”

We do not live in a free country.

The lockdowns are even more totalitarian than the labor laws and regulations on the books. They prevent you from working even if you are obeying all the existing labor laws!

Did your legislatures pass lockdown laws? No. One available list shows that state governors in the U.S. mainly did this. Health authorities, counties and cities seem also to have instigated lockdowns.

In the name of a health measure, state governors infringed the natural right to work. It’s a natural right because that’s how you sustain yourself and live. That’s how you pursue happiness. If you are denied the means to “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, you cannot have or secure those natural rights. The right to work follows as a natural right because it’s necessary to achieve the major ends of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; and the making of voluntary work arrangements involves only the presumed justly-held property of the participants making the exchange.

By ordering lockdowns, these governors betrayed the Declaration of Independence “…That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted…” They betrayed us. They betrayed their states. They betrayed their country. They may have done so in panic or mistakenly or to look good or to save lives or for any number of reasons, but there is no doubt. Their lockdowns orders were and are betrayals.

The governors betrayed our principles. There is no point in having principles, such as individual rights to work, to life, to liberty and to the pursuit of happiness, if they are violated hastily and unlawfully and then replaced by their very opposites. It’s worthy of the term “betrayal”

Supposing that our governments are actually designed to possess “…just Powers from the Consent of the Governed…” as the Declaration says, can lockdowns that abrogate natural rights possibly be exercises of “just Powers”? How can government actions that do the very opposite of securing rights, which is the main purpose and end of our governments, be seen as anything other than exercises of UNJUST powers?

To implement one’s right to work generally involves travel on public roads. Does the government’s presence in the system of roads render right to work an empty idea, stymied because of a property rights barrier? Not one whit. Highway departments maintain roads, governments get them built, but the funding comes from taxes at all levels. Taxpayers own the roads, not your City Manager or County Supervisor. They are your agents. The right to work includes rights to travel on the roads, over bridges, through tunnels, etc. Having paid for them, they are your property, jointly owned to be sure, but meant to be available so that you exercise your rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They too are essential parts of the larger right to work. They are necessary means, and the use of them cannot coercively be prevented by governments without violating your right to work.

If courts understand and defend the police power as an essential if unstated part of government constitutions, then why should they not also understand and defend the right to work as an essential right of We the People? Why should we all not recognize it and strongly resist its abrogation?

These lockdown orders were extreme. It’s madness to think that putting millions out of work can stop an epidemic, especially one that’s already well underway. Its madness and ignorance to think this can be done without causing a great many more deaths by other follow-on effects of the lockdowns.

In sum, all people, including Americans, have a right to work, a natural right. It follows from the basic rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. And following from the right to work are rights of travel over means paid for by taxpayers, who largely work and also use those means for other ends.

For whatever motivations, governors issued lockdown orders denying the exercise of the right to work, without which life cannot long be sustained. This is reason enough alone to condemn the lockdown measures strongly.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

Trump Reminds Us that America Is a Military Nation – The Future of Freedom Foundation

Posted by M. C. on July 9, 2019

https://www.fff.org/2019/07/05/trump-reminds-us-that-america-is-a-military-nation/

by

President Trump is being criticized for surrounding himself with tanks, armored vehicles, flyovers, and generals and admirals during his Fourth of July celebration at the Lincoln Memorial. Critics say that it was unseemly for the president to be showing off the federal government’s military prowess on Independence Day. Some said it conjured up images of the Soviet Union, when that communist regime would showcase its tanks and military hardware in parades in Moscow’s Red Square.

But the fact is that America is a military nation. As Trump pointed out in his Independence Day address, the United States has the most powerful military in history, one that can pulverize any other nation on earth. His critics don’t have any problem with that. They just don’t want Trump to highlight it.

Of course, it wasn’t always that way. In extolling America’s position as a military nation, Trump left out something important in his talk: America did not start out as a military nation. In fact, quite the contrary. America was founded as a limited-government republic, not a military nation.

In fact, the people who founded the United States abhorred the concept of a military nation. That’s one of the reasons they chose to revolt against their own government, which was a military nation, one whose officials extolled its military prowess, just as Trump does today with America.

It’s easy to think of the people who signed the Declaration of Independence as great Americans. They weren’t. The reason they weren’t was that they weren’t Americans. They were British citizens. They were every bit as British as Americans today are Americans.

Americans today praise the signers of the Declaration as patriots. But I will guarantee you that their government didn’t consider them to be patriots. They considered them to be terrorists, criminals, and traitors. If the government had won, the rebels would have been long forgotten,

What about the British troops? Not surprisingly, the government exhorted the British colonists to support the troops. They pointed out what Trump pointed out yesterday — that it is the duty of the citizenry to support the troops because they are protecting the nation and the freedom of the citizenry.

And in fact, it has been estimated that about one-third of the British colonists did end up supporting the troops during the Revolution. They sided with their government and cheered the troops as they tried to put down the rebellion by killing the British citizens who were doing the rebelling.

The British revolutionaries, on the other hand, absolutely refused to support the troops. On the contrary, they chose to shoot and kill the troops. They wanted the troops to surrender and return to England so that they could establish their own nation, one that would not be a military nation like the one against which they were rebelling.

So, who were the real patriots — the ones who supported the troops or the ones who shot and killed the troops? In the movie The Patriot, which starred Mel Gibson, the answer was that the patriots were those who are willing to stand up to the wrongdoing of their own government, which sometimes means standing up to the government’s troops...

Be seeing you

ruby ridge

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

5 reasons Independence Day is for the anti-government rebels | The Daily Bell

Posted by M. C. on July 4, 2019

https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/news-analysis/5-reasons-independence-day-is-for-the-anti-government-rebels/

By Joe Jarvis

No matter how many things are wrong with this nation, Independence Day is not a time for cynicism and pessimism.

Celebrate America, and celebrate it hard.

Because the 4th of July is NOT about supporting this government or blind patriotism.

Independence Day is about the rebel American spirit that gave a big middle finger to the government oppressors.

Yes, the government will try to take this holiday and make it about them. But true rebels know, this holiday is as anti-government as they come.

Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The equality of all human beings, regardless of race religion, or NATIONALITY…

These are these self-evident truths made explicit in the Declaration of Independence that we celebrate today.

1. It is your right, and DUTY to ABOLISH a government that no longer represents you.

The entire point of governments is to protect your life, liberty, and property and

whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…

[W]hen a long train of abuses and usurpations… reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

2. Governments are authorized ONLY by the “consent of the governed.”

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

This means it is the right of any individual to withdraw their consent in a peaceful way. Government has no right to bring you violently back into the fold.

And if you find yourself in a group that is not in unanimous agreement, you have the right to leave that group.

ALL government power stems from the people. If the people delegate our powers to the government, that means the government cannot justly do anything that an individual is not justified in doing.

Can you violently attack your neighbor if he does not pay you? Can you force him into your group without his consent? Then the government can’t do it on your behalf.

At that point, it has become an unjust government, and lacks the consent required to be legitimate.

3. Rights come from the “Laws of Nature and Nature’s God.”

[I]n the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.

Whatever you want to call it, God-given or natural law, rights exists independent of government.

The fact that someone or a group violates your rights does not render them non-existent. They are a concept, an idea that sets out the best way to interact peacefully in a society.

These natural rights say that you can associate, or dissassociate with whomever you wish.

It is your right to dissolve ties with someone–or a group–who abuses you.

4. “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness” are “unalienable Rights.”

Most people might not realize that when you extrapolite these rights, they include any action that doesn’t hurt someone else.

Life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness covers the right to own the fruits of your labor. To enter into contracts, to sell, to buy, to own property.

To protect yourself against any and all aggression.

And there is a clear line that governments and individuals are wrong when they cross.

Here’s the test: is that action interfering in anyone else’s rights to life, liberty, and the persuit of happiness?

No? Then it’s a right.

5. We tried to do this the easy way…

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury…

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our… brethren…

We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice…

We have not been silent about the abuses the US government have piled on top of the American people, and people of other nations.

They, and many of our brtehren have ignored and mocked these injustices.

They got fair warning, and unfortunaly one of these days, we might have to protect our rights the hard way, just like in 1776.

Be seeing you

God Bless America: The Religious Values Of The Declaration ...

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Rutherford Institute :: It’s Time to Declare Your Independence from Tyranny, America | By John W. Whitehead |

Posted by M. C. on July 3, 2019

https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/its_time_to_declare_your_independence_from_tyranny_america

By John W. Whitehead

“These are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.”—Thomas Paine, December 1776

It’s time to declare your independence from tyranny, America.

For too long now, we have suffered the injustices of a government that has no regard for our rights or our humanity.

Too easily pacified and placated by the pomp and pageantry of manufactured spectacles (fireworks on the Fourth of July, military parades, ritualized elections, etc.) that are a poor substitute for a representative government that respects the rights of its people, the American people have opted, time and again, to overlook the government’s excesses, abuses and power grabs that fly in the face of every principle for which America’s founders risked their lives.

We have done this to ourselves.

Indeed, it is painfully fitting that mere days before the nation prepared to celebrate its freedoms on the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the City Council for Charlottesville, Virginia—the home of Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration—voted to do away with a holiday to honor Jefferson’s birthday, because Jefferson, like many of his contemporaries, owned slaves. City councilors have opted instead to celebrate “Liberation and Freedom Day” in honor of slaves who were emancipated after the Civil War.

This is what we have been reduced to: bureaucrats dithering over meaningless trivialities while the government goosesteps all over our freedoms.

Too often, we pay lip service to those freedoms, yet they did not come about by happenstance. They were hard won through sheer determination, suffering and sacrifice by thousands of patriotic Americans who not only believed in the cause of freedom but also had the intestinal fortitude to act on that belief. The success of the American revolution owes much to these men and women.

In standing up to the British Empire and speaking out against an oppressive regime, they exemplified courage in the face of what seemed like an overwhelming foe.

Indeed, imagine living in a country where armed soldiers crash through doors to arrest and imprison citizens merely for criticizing government officials.

Imagine that in this very same country, you’re watched all the time, and if you look even a little bit suspicious, the police stop and frisk you or pull you over to search you on the off chance you’re doing something illegal.

Keep in mind that if you have a firearm of any kind (or anything that resembled a firearm) while in this country, it may get you arrested and, in some circumstances, shot by police.

If you’re thinking this sounds like America today, you wouldn’t be far wrong.

However, the scenario described above took place more than 200 years ago, when American colonists suffered under Great Britain’s version of an early police state. It was only when the colonists finally got fed up with being silenced, censored, searched, frisked, threatened, and arrested that they finally revolted against the tyrant’s fetters.

No document better states their grievances than the Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas Jefferson…

We could certainly use some of that revolutionary outrage today.

Certainly, we would do well to reclaim the revolutionary spirit of our ancestors and remember what drove them to such drastic measures in the first place.

Then again, perhaps what we need to do is declare our independence from the tyranny of the American police state.

It’s not a radical idea.

It has been done before.

The Declaration of Independence speaks volumes about the abuses suffered by early Americans at the hands of the British police state.

Read the Declaration of Independence again, and ask yourself if the list of complaints tallied by Jefferson don’t bear a startling resemblance to the abuses “we the people” are suffering at the hands of the American police state.

If you find the purple prose used by the Founders hard to decipher, here’s my translation of what the Declaration of Independence would look and sound like if it were written in the modern vernacular:

There comes a time when a populace must stand united and say “enough is enough” to the government’s abuses, even if it means getting rid of the political parties in power.

Believing that “we the people” have a natural and divine right to direct our own lives, here are truths about the power of the people and how we arrived at the decision to sever our ties to the government:

All people are created equal.

All people possess certain innate rights that no government or agency or individual can take away from them. Among these are the right to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The government’s job is to protect the people’s innate rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The government’s power comes from the will of the people.

Whenever any government abuses its power, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish that government and replace it with a new government that will respect and protect the rights of the people.

It is not wise to get rid of a government for minor transgressions. In fact, as history has shown, people resist change and are inclined to suffer all manner of abuses to which they have become accustomed.

However, when the people have been subjected to repeated abuses and power grabs, carried out with the purpose of establishing a tyrannical government, people have a right and duty to do away with that tyrannical Government and to replace it with a new government that will protect and preserve their innate rights for their future wellbeing.

This is exactly the state of affairs we are under suffering under right now, which is why it is necessary that we change this imperial system of government.

The history of the present Imperial Government is a history of repeated abuses and power grabs, carried out with the intention of establishing absolute Tyranny over the country.

To prove this, consider the following:

The government has, through its own negligence and arrogance, refused to adopt urgent and necessary laws for the good of the people.

The government has threatened to hold up critical laws unless the people agree to relinquish their right to be fully represented in the Legislature.

In order to expand its power and bring about compliance with its dictates, the government has made it nearly impossible for the people to make their views and needs heard by their representatives.

The government has repeatedly suppressed protests arising in response to its actions.

The government has obstructed justice by refusing to appoint judges who respect the Constitution and has instead made the Courts march in lockstep with the government’s dictates.

The government has allowed its agents to harass the people, steal from them, jail them and even execute them.

The government has directed militarized government agents—a.k.a., a standing army—to police domestic affairs in peacetime.

The government has turned the country into a militarized police state.

The government has conspired to undermine the rule of law and the constitution in order to expand its own powers.

The government has allowed its militarized police to invade our homes and inflict violence on homeowners.

The government has failed to hold its agents accountable for wrongdoing and murder under the guise of “qualified immunity.”

The government has jeopardized our international trade agreements.

The government has overtaxed us without our permission.

The government has denied us due process and the right to a fair trial.

The government has engaged in extraordinary rendition.

The government has continued to expand its military empire in collusion with its corporate partners-in-crime and occupy foreign nations.

The government has eroded fundamental legal protections and destabilized the structure of government.

The government has not only declared its federal powers superior to those of the states but has also asserted its sovereign power over the rights of “we the people.”

The government has ceased to protect the people and instead waged domestic war against the people.

The government has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, and destroyed the lives of the people.

The government has employed private contractors and mercenaries to carry out acts of death, desolation and tyranny, totally unworthy of a civilized nation.

The government through its political propaganda has pitted its citizens against each other.

The government has stirred up civil unrest and laid the groundwork for martial law.

Repeatedly, we have asked the government to cease its abuses. Each time, the government has responded with more abuse.

An Imperial Ruler who acts like a tyrant is not fit to govern a free people.

We have repeatedly sounded the alarm to our fellow citizens about the government’s abuses. We have warned them about the government’s power grabs. We have appealed to their sense of justice. We have reminded them of our common bonds.

They have rejected our plea for justice and brotherhood. They are equally at fault for the injustices being carried out by the government.

Thus, for the reasons mentioned above, we the people of the united States of America declare ourselves free from the chains of an abusive government. Relying on God’s protection, we pledge to stand by this Declaration of Independence with our lives, our fortunes and our honor.

That was 243 years ago…

Only this time, the tyrant is one of our own making: the American Police State. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Facebook Algorithm Flags The Declaration Of Independence As “Hate Speech”

Posted by M. C. on July 5, 2018

Zuckerberg and his minions making sure we have (their version of) the truth.

https://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/facebook-algorithm-flags-the-declaration-of-independence-as-hate-speech_07042018

Mac Slavo

…Over the last couple of years major social media, news and video platforms have been actively engaged in the censorship of what they believe to be fake news and information. Often spearheaded by third-party review organizations known to have biased views, there have been countless examples of unpopular speech and commentary that has seen its distribution suppressed or outright banned.

…To give you an idea of the kind of automation in play and what words and ideas are being identified Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »