In Part I, I wrote about how servants seems to be trying to goad gun owners and militia-types into doing something stupid. I pointed out why that is unlikely, and before November, it is important for citizens outside the liberty culture to look at this.
The second and third reasons are these: Liberty purists operate on the knowledge that we are the sovereign and the servant is not, and the knowledge that this is more than sufficient to protect our interests non-violently in fortifying that first reason. Put another way: we have confidence in the system. When you believe in due process as we do, when you summon it, when you love this system, and when you live by it and depend on it so, you understand that provocation won't work on you. The irritating part is that the left believes that it will. What does that tell you? What has this been telling you all along?
Now that's two good reasons. A third reason is that when we prove that provocation does not work and that due process does, we then have a real legacy to hand down, do we not? This puts citizens in control.
Let me put this in terms even an official can understand: we will not make foolish efforts to overthrow our own servants because you are servants at our behest. How can the sovereign technically or legally overthrow servants? Only a force external to the sovereign can do that. We hire and fire. We elect or unseat. It is not possible to overthrow servants. Meanwhile, laws are already in place to keep servants servants and nothing more. In the case of Bell, California's official looting of its own treasury of the people, you see due process at work. The outrage is a righteous one, not for overthrowing government, but for upbraiding servants who forgot they are servants and not the sovereign. When officials do what they do so well -- looting the treasury -- please note how outraged citizens summon not violence, but due process.
But the very best evidence to clarify the issue is here: A 2008 Huffington Post Article of his [The Game of Monopoly] has Josh Horwitz betraying a powerful and dangerous misunderstanding from the git-go and in his words: "The question of whether armed citizens should be entitled to challenge the government with force is at the heart of the current debate over the Second Amendment in the Supreme Court case of District of Columbia vs. Heller."
In D.C. v. Heller, the 2008 issue was not as Horwitz framed it, and the ruling haded down was adverse to the left's wants. The distressing habit of this peccadillo of vexing Americans persists. This gleeful vexing is the real reason for their existence. Mr. Horwitz couldn't be more wrong. But then, all leftists operate on the wrong basis entirely. For, it is not we who challenge the government, it is the government who challenges us.
If leftists believe that our government is the sovereign, then everything they believe thereafter is going to be wrong. Legally wrong, technically inappropriate, morally wrong, poorly blueprinted and doomed to failure. The biggest malfeasance of leftism is that in order for it even to survive at all, its policies have to fail one after the other.
The TEA Party, the republicans, the libertarians, the independents and the conservatives all need to get together on one thing: we do not challenge the government, the entire complaint is that the government has been challenging us.
Our public servants operate only on our authority, and when they challenge that, they need to be unseated. Unforgiven. Aus!! When officials bring even so much as one weapon to bear on the sovereign - smear, voter tampering, assumptions of powers not granted - it is they who escalate, not we.
Those weapons are currently working and have been for decades. Oh, and this distinct feeling that Americans can be provoked into doing something foolish. This reveals a decerebrate mis-read of a middle-right nation. When violence is anticipated and does not appear, provocation rhetoric becomes conspicuous. And when the people are still not provoked, they are smeared to make every act of violence somehow in line with smear's expectations. Americans are divided. But are we? It looks more now that Americans are coming together.
We the people need to adjust more precisely the wording of our identity temporarily for the duration and to solemnize and revere our authority over our servants. We need to change the we the people signage and placard we carry to become we the sovereign, and never back down.
The key is due process and follow-through on our exclusive sovereign authority. And our identity as the sovereign. Remember that wherever they came for the guns, they really came for and left with the sovereignty of the people at that same moment. The second amendment is the lawful lethal force which backs our sovereign authority over our servants. All gun control is a direct challenge to our sovereignty.
Broadcasting criminal shootings is by now a recognizable tactic to summon fear and to sway opinion. But a civil right is not subject to sway, another misunderstanding of the left.
It's time Americans understood that the left is not simply another political opinion, but tragically wrong and positively incompatible with liberty.
Think due process. Think involvement of the sovereign in supervising the servants. Think November.
Be sure to register for my Safer Streets Newsletter.
______________________________________________________________
John Longenecker's web page is GoodForTheCountry.com and purchase a copy of Safer Streets 2010, John's pre-election sequel to his hardcover book, Safe Streets..
Comments
Two of your best columns ever, Mr. Longenecker.
"If leftists believe that our government is the sovereign, then everything they believe thereafter is going to be wrong." Well said.
Someone said of Orwell's Big Brother image of tyranny as "a boot stamping on a human face, forever" that it doesn't matter whether it's a right boot or a left boot. A November rush to the other side of the boat, the Republican side, simply means capsizing more slowly in the other direction. The unelected bureaucracy Juggernaut grinds on. If the current situation doesn't make third-party freedom and constitution candidates "electable," I don't know what will.
leticia olalia morales of 15501 pasadena avE #8 tustin ca 92780 submitted fake employment records to obtain a US work visa. she also used fake documents and paid a consul 5000.00 for a US tourist visa. she is now applying for citizenship.
Thanks, Defender. Circulate the link to Parts I and II.
The only hope for Republicrats is the promise of smaller government. They don't get it, tho. They're too wrapped up in it themselves with benefits of being a congress critter. Part of what we can do therefore, is going to be contacting them in large numbers and saying the same thing: you have to repeal health care with a moratorium of three years to examine it, and you have to repeal all gun laws as official recognition of who is the sovereign.
We'll tell you the rest when you get into office if you stump on these two things.
First things first.
No, John, I neither trust or "love" the "system," in any way. I do not want or need any "servants" to run my life or steal or "control" my property. Those who wish to hire (and pay for) such servants should, of course, be perfectly free to do so.
The ONLY outcome of any election: New boss, same as old boss.
www.independent.org/blog/index.php?p=6334
Consent of the Governed? By Robert Higgs
What gives some people the right to rule others? At least since John Locke’s time, the most common and seemingly compelling answer has been “the consent of the governed.” When the North American revolutionaries set out to justify their secession from the British Empire, they declared, among other things: “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed.” This sounds good, especially if one doesn’t think about it very hard or very long, but the harder and longer one thinks about it, the more problematic it becomes.
John, the argument makes sense only if we HAVE to have servants. We don't - free people can do their own work individually. While the Constitution (and the 50 State Constitutions) were contracts between "we, the people" (well, some of us) to HIRE folks to work for us; but these folks have perverted the contract, so that they think that THEY are the masters: they think they are sovereign. The election process and government procedures are all designed based on THEM being the bosses: "You people are the masses and do what WE say you should. All you get to do is pick out who are the big bosses for this term." Then, with the Abominable Act (ObamaCare), they have totally voided the contract - while still going through the motions. Now their aggression against us is virtually unconstrained. This election, people who think a new set of bosses will solve anything are guilty of insanity: doing the same thing over and over and expecting something different. It is time to fight.
Well, John... seems you (or someone) is deleting the comments here. Which is it?
This new "examiner" page is playing games. The comments did not load the first three times I refreshed this page. Glad to see they are still here.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!