SHOULD we fight? For what? Are we ready?

There’s a lot of chest-beating, sturm und drang over the recent events in Nevada.  Some people think this should be our Battle of Lexington.
Americans should’ve been up in arms a hundred years ago, when a relative handful of moneychanger cronies took over the country.  That would’ve been morally and constitutionally warranted.  So I suppose every minute since then could serve as good as another to set things right in this nation.

But…why this?
And how did we get here?

Isn’t the corruption of our republic exactly and only what We The People have freely and repetitiously chosen every Tax Day, every Election Day for the past one hundred years?
We are here because it’s where we chose to go.  What’s different now?  What’s in Nevada that should make us fight?

The Nevada Constitution (1864) is dreadful.
First, under the ordinance empowering the state’s constitutional convention was this:
“Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.”

And that led to some of the most horrible words humans ever wrote into law in their Article I, Section 2:

“But the Paramount Allegiance of every citizen is due to the Federal Government in the exercise of all its Constitutional powers as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States; and no power exists in the people of this or any other State of the Federal Union to dissolve their connection therewith or perform any act tending to impair[,] subvert, or resist the Supreme Authority of the government of the United States. The Constitution of the United States confers full power on the Federal Government to maintain and Perpetuate its existance [existence], and whensoever any portion of the States, or people thereof attempt to secede from the Federal Union, or forcibly resist the Execution of its laws, the Federal Government may, by warrant of the Constitution, employ armed force in compelling obedience to its Authority.”

There’s a lot of anticonstitutional, antilibertarian madness in that; perhaps the worst being that it essentially places the Supreme Court above both the states, and the federal constitution itself.  That’s entirely opposed to the founders’ original intent and plain words.

That phrase, “…as the same have been or may be defined by the Supreme Court of the United States” replaces the written US constitution with SCOTUS whimsy.  And that phrase makes the constitution of Nevada irrelevant in any way other than as a declaration of complete obeisance to our global ruling class.

I’ve already said I understand the role of physical resistance and even violence in the way that MLK Jr’s efforts were almost certainly made more effective by the “bad cop” role of people like Robert F. Willams (president of the Monroe, North Carolina chapter of the NAACP – you should look up his story – very relevant to 2nd Amendment discussions) the Black Power movement, Black Panthers, etc.

But man o man I wish the armed and angry folks would find a better cause to fight over than what’s happening with the ever-vague land use rights in the west…particularly in Nevada.

I’ve got a list of things that should make you tornado rocket nuclear lightning mad, if you’re interested.  (like, you and your loved ones are being robbed and deceived right now…as I write this)

But let’s agree to how we’re to live instead before we try to overthrow anything or anybody.  Because what we’ve got is what we have been choosing for a hundred years every Election Day.

There are hard ways and easy ways to change things.  But before you go and change things again (remember, what we have really is change – change is constant), you’d better finally get into your head exactly what it is that you want instead.

About these ads

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: http://wedeclare.wordpress.com/2014/04/14/should-we-fight-for-what-are-we-ready/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

2 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. That does NOT mean that the Federal government can own the lands. Article 1 Section 8 clearly spells out the legitimate purposes for which the Feds MAY acquire and exercise legislative control over land. Guess what? Grazing land, national parks, tortoise habitat and BLM land grabs are NOT on the list. So even if Nevada bent over and said, “May I have another please?”, the Feds aren’t authorized to exercise legislative control over the land unless it’s for “forts, magazine, navy-yards and other needful buildings”.

    Bear in mind, the Constitution grants certain ENUMERATED powers to the Federal government. Owning huge swaths of land in Nevada is not one of them – regardless of what the Nevada state constitution may allow.

  2. I absolutely agree. I am no part of this Democrat v Republican, All This or All That paradigm!
    Our government is ungoverned, lawless, corrupt and destructive.
    It ought to be opposed with all our wits and might.
    My point, however, is that we have all sorts of good grounds for this…the Bundy case is not a good one.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: