The Federal Republic of America
“We have but one ORDER in America, and that of the highest degree, the ORDER OF SOVEREIGNTY, and of this ORDER every citizen is member of his own personal right. Why then have we descended to the base imitation of inferior things? By the event of the Revolution we were put in a condition of thinking originally. The history of past ages shows scarcely anything to us but instances of tyranny and antiquated absurdities. We have copied some of them and experienced the folly of them. . . .” Constitutional Reform (The Thomas Paine Reader P536)
The magnitude of
Government Mandated Opiate in the form of propaganda distributed throughout the public school system is unparalleled in the history of Man. Nowhere do we find the production of ideology in social and educative media so extensive that it mimics stage 4 cancer, than is found throughout world civilizations of the last 200 years. We citizens have been served up a diet of misconceptions, distortions, propaganda, and outright lies concerning our country’s history and its political foundations.
Recently Chip Bok produced a cartoon lampooning Mitt Romney which exemplifies the disingenuousness of politicians, and the public’s gullibility: http:/bokbluster.com/category/politics/2016-presidential-campaign-politics-trump/
Of these two public phenomena Hannah Arendt wrote extensively, which I shall examine later.
It ought to be recalled when the creature entitled
The United States of America came into being. I doubt that the vast majority of citizens in this country can accurately answer this question. Many will first think that it was when George Washington became President. This is an error. George was never president of the United States of America. George was the first president of
The Federal Republic of America. John Hanson, the son of a Swedish immigrant, was the first president of the United States of America, and was followed by six more, until the form of the Union was dissolved. This is the locus of the first lie and its attendant propaganda fed to us in public education and media. Here I differ from the Founding Fathers Edmund Randolph, who split hairs over the meaning of Federal vs National at the Convention, and James Madison who characterized the Constitution as both Federal and National. Virtually everyone at the time, particularly among the Delegates, had a different concept of what form of government they were seeking. Franklin’s comment to Peter Collinson of 1754* about no one having an undistracted concept of Union was just as applicable during the Convention of 1787.
How do they get away with it?
First, people are credulous, tending to believe what they hear. If it weren’t for that, much of what exists in modern society would not function. Our money system would soon break down, as it so often nearly has.
Second, people are ordinarily so busy with the maintenance of their daily lives, and the pursuit of individual happiness, they do not take the time to verify what they hear and are taught. They do not stop to digest and analyze and ferret out the implications of what they are told.
Third, that Spirit of ’76, the one that inspired every soul who immigrated to this country to discover their own destiny, unchained from the tyrannies of the feudal systems of Europe, was subverted and systematically dismantled through a radical change in the form of government they had laboriously created.
They had spent their fortunes and their lives to wrest back control of personal and political destiny out of the hands of the British Parliament, King George, and the European bankers. No sooner than they narrowly accomplished this objective, they were sold out by designing men, from the inside, by a conspiracy and fraud, intended to mimic the old British form of government. The first government, the Confederation of the United States of America, was the grand experiment in self-government that sent shock waves around the world. It was this mystique, this bold declaration, this grand opportunity of personal liberty that uprooted people around the planet from their native homelands to the shores of North America.
That Spirit was broken in a matter of eleven years. How?
First, war always creates debt. The United States of America was financially broke. There is no surer path to envy, strife, and disunion than the want of financial solvency. Every newlywed couple meets this dilemma head on.
Second, war makes people physically and spiritually weary. The moment a threat disappears, that hostilities cease, the participants on both sides of the conflict want to return to peaceful pursuits and regain prosperity. It is at this moment they are most vulnerable to plunder. If someone comes along and promises to relieve them of burdens they are weary of they can be easily persuaded to yield up their liberties for comfort. ("If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They'll have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government." –Dwight Eisenhower) Man, being of natural trust and goodwill in other men, find it easy to surrender their interest in preserving their liberty to someone else, appointed to the task of civic exigencies.
Third, war destroys property. Property is the foundation of wealth, which described differently, is the means by which Man is able to stave off starvation, exposure, disease, and early death. This is the fundamental meaning of the “pursuit of happiness.”
So what happened?
The United States of America, created under the
Articles of Confederation, was unable to recompense the volunteer militia who had so valiantly sought to preserve the Union against British depredation. The United States was in debt to the French aristocracy for their assistance in throwing off the British destruction of Colonial money, homes, and property. Their only recourse to service those debts were tariffs, taxes, and printing paper money. All three failed. War destroys personal wealth. Always. The result was near instant insurrection, with the threat of its leaders to disband the Confederation and install George Washington as King.
At length, the Continental Congress deliberated over the causes of the economic situation, and commissioned delegates to address aspects of the Articles of Confederation which did not specify responsibilities in these matters unilaterally among the United States of America. These delegates were sent to Philadelphia to deliberate on how to justly apportion the various States an equitable course of remedy. Those delegates abandoned their directive and duty, and proceeded to
usurp power invested in the Continental Congress to
change the form of government. This is what took place in the years between the Declaration of Independence, the founding of the United States of America, and the Constitutional Convention. What happened at this convention is at the heart of all the subsequent lies taught the American public.
Not long into the study of the Federal Constitutional convention the investigator discovers the delegates appointed by the Continental Congress, commissioned to revise the Articles of Confederation, did no such thing. Instead they produced a document restructuring the Union of States into a National government, with powers over the States. This act, produced in secret, was a conspiracy, and what they did was commit fraud by conspiracy upon the Continental Congress, the States, and the citizenry. In English common law such fraudulent agreements and declarations are void and non-binding. But at the behest of George Washington in a letter to Congress, they rolled over and complied with it. In essence, this is what George told the Congress:
“Individuals entering into society, must give up a share of liberty to preserve the rest. The magnitude of the sacrifice must depend as well on situation and circumstance, as on the object to be obtained. It is at all times difficult to draw with precision the line between those rights which must be surrendered, and those which may be reserved; and on the present occasion this difficulty was encreased by a difference among the several states as to their situation, extent, habits, and particular interests.
In all our deliberations on this subject we kept steadily in our view, that which appears to us the greatest interest of every true American, the consolidation of our Union,…” Bold mine. (quoted in Conspiracy in Philadelphia P xxv, Gary North.)
This is a most astounding and heinous lie. It is an odious and fallacious affectation. The Articles of Confederation were founded on the principle that
no one must surrender a single right in order to defend and preserve their endowed Rights. The United States of America under the Articles of Confederation, though hard pressed, successfully threw off the British yoke without surrendering a single individual Right. This principle of Union was eloquently addressed by Frederic Bastiat nearly a hundred years later:
“Force has been given to us to defend our own individual rights. Who will dare to say that force has been given to us to destroy the equal rights of our brothers? Since no individual acting separately can lawfully use force to destroy the rights of others, does it not logically follow that the same principle also applies to the common force that is nothing more than the organized combination of the individual forces?
If this is true, then nothing can be more evident than this: The law is the organization of natural right of lawful defense. It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces. And this common force is to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do: to protect persons, liberties, and properties; Maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us all.” (The Law pp2-3)
Bastiat didn’t invent this principle,
it was expressly written into the Articles of Confederation! The author of the selected draft for the Articles was Benjamin Franklin. In Franklin’s deliberations over what form of government best suited to bind the States in common cause, among the material he studied was the various governments of local Native American tribes. The form of Union was modeled after their separation of powers and function. It was a
decentralized form of cooperation among common interests. This decentralized form of organization was had among several Indian tribes, such as the Apache, among modern terrorist cells, and is emulated in numerous business ventures today such as eBay, Amazon, and Toyota. It is a non feudal, non hierarchical organization where all individuals have equal voice and choose freely who they will follow. It is powered by a common vision and ideology, which forms the motive force supporting the organization.
It is Benjamin Franklin who is the Father of the United States of America, the form of government meant only to secure everyone’s safety and liberty. George Washington is the stooge who perpetrated the fraud of The Federal Republic of America, the form of government that acts by the power of coercion and positive law. This myth is propaganda and lie number two, the first being George’s mendacity with the Continental Congress. In fact, George had to pander favors among his Masonic friends (>90% of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention) in order to gain access. The condition of his presiding at the assembly was that he keep his mouth shut and remain a figurehead! (
American Aurora, pp467-469, 476) It was this Masonic influence among the delegates that produced the oath of secrecy and locked doors during the deliberations that is the very definition of conspiracy.
What citizens today do not understand for deliberate obfuscation of the details in public education is, all debates, referendums, ratifications, and elections subsequent to an act of fraud are also void. It does not matter who supported it, nor how many, nor why. A fraud is not made null by its acceptance. The Federal Convention’s deliberations remain an infringement upon the Rights of Man as enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, to wit:
“when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,…” Italics mine
James Madison in a letter to the Virginia General Assembly of 1785 over the matter of State sponsored religions excoriated them for attempting to legislate beyond their authority:
“The preservation of a free government requires not merely, that the metes and bounds which separate each department of power may be invariably maintained; but more especially, that neither of them be suffered to overleap the great Barrier which defends the rights of the people. The Rulers who are guilty of such an encroachment, exceed the commission from which they derive their authority, and are Tyrants. The People who submit to it are governed by laws made neither by themselves, nor by an authority derived from them, and are slaves.” Bold mine (Quoted in The Mind of the Founder P7)
But who was it that was Father of the Federal Constitution two years later, and the recorder of the proceedings? Did he not engage in the same encroachment as the Virginia Assembly did on religion? Was not Madison the very Tyrant he condemned? Did not he design (and the delegates sanction) the foundation for slavery under the Federal Republic of America?
Eighty two years later Lysander Spooner at the close of the Civil War reiterated this concept of tyrannical majority:
"The North has thus virtually said to the world: It was all very well to prate of consent, so long as the objects to be accomplished were to liberate ourselves from our connexion with England, and also to coax a scattered and jealous people into a great national union; but now that those purposes have been accomplished, and the power of the North has become consolidated, it is sufficient for us—as for all governments—simply to say: Our power is our right." Italics mine (No Treason P4)
The Continental Congress failed in their duty to reject Washington’s letter and the Federal Constitution, as did the States, who all in collusion with the pseudo-Federalists from 1787 to 1789, proceeded to ratify a change in the form of government that was hierarchical and feudalistic in its intent. The Anti-Federalists attempted to warn the citizenry against the mendacity proposed in newspaper publications, since compiled into The Federalist Papers, and the response in The Anti-Federalist Papers. But it was to no avail.
Hannah Arendt, who was one of the few women who successfully exited a WWII German concentration camp before the borders were closed, spent the rest of her life studying the rise of National Socialism and its effects upon the populace and leaders. She became well known for her publications in the Western world throughout the Cold War period. In her widely heralded book
The Origin of Totalitarianism she wrote about the nature of conspiratorial societies:
“The chief value, however, of the secret or conspiratory societies' organizational structure and moral standards for purposes of mass organization does not even lie in the inherent guarantees of unconditional belonging and loyalty, and organizational manifestation of unquestioned hostility to the outside world, but in their unsurpassed capacity to establish and safeguard the fictitious world through consistent lying. The whole hierarchical structure of totalitarian movements, from naive fellow-travelers to party members, elite formations, the intimate circle around the Leader, and the Leader himself, could be described in terms of a curiously varying mixture of gullibility and cynicism with which each member, depending upon his rank and standing in the movement, is expected to react to the changing lying statements of the leaders and the central unchanging ideological fiction of the movement.” (The Origin of Totalitarianism P369)
Continuing her examination she describes the very National Socialist environment in which the post Revloutionary Federalists operated:
“Without the organizational division of the movement into elite formations, membership, and sympathizers, the lies of the Leader would not work. The graduation of cynicism expressed in a hierarchy of contempt is at least as necessary in the face of constant refutation as plain gullibility. The point is that the sympathizers in front organizations despise their fellow-citizens' complete lack of initiation, the party members despise the fellow-travelers' gullibility and lack of radicalism, the elite formations despise for similar reasons the party membership, and within the elite formations a similar hierarchy of contempt accompanies every new foundation and development. The result of this system is that the gullibility of sympathizers makes lies credible to the outside world, while at the same time the graduated cynicism of membership and elite formations eliminates the danger that the Leader will ever be forced by the weight of his own propaganda to make good his own statements and feigned respectability.” (The Origin of Totalitarianism P371)
Today we have an overwhelming abundance of Hannah’s descriptions in the District of Columbia, just in the last two Presidential administrations alone. The CFR and the Trilateral Commission are some of the obvious "elite formations" which exude this contempt of the People. The tragedy of it is this feudalism extends all the way back to the very beginning, under the direction of George Washington, and before him the Constitutional Convention. The root of its ideology is the antithesis of self-preservation—the fallacious argument that a group of people have the right to enforce their will upon an individual or minority, simply because they out-number them. Or, that a minority of sufficient size and power, have the right to enforce their will upon the majority. This fallacious doctrine, concocted by men lusting for influence, eminence, and power was expressed again by Madison:
“According to Republican Theory, Right and power being both vested in the majority, are held to be synonimous. According to fact and experience a minority may in an appeal to force, be an over-match for the majority. 1. if the minority happen to include all such as possess the skill and habits of military life, & such as possess the great pecuniary resources, one-third only may conquer the remaining two-thirds. 2. one-third of those who participate in the choice of the rulers, may be rendered a majority by the accession of those whose poverty excludes them from a right of suffrage, and who for obvious reasons will be more likely to join the standard of sedition than that of the established Government. 3. where slavery exists the republican Theory becomes still more fallacious.” Bold mine. (Quoted in The Mind of the Founder P59)
What does have bearing here is the concept of government altogether—the very idea that people everywhere must be regulated in their activities beyond the simple expedient of preserving their mutual safety of persons, property, and privilege. The control of persons, property, and expression by coercion is a tyranny, and is the express cause of the failure of all governments in the history of Man, prior to the founding of the United States of America. But Madison argued before the Assembly that Republican power and right are the same—that might makes right, that those possessing martial skill sufficient to subdue, or financial acumen to effect the same, have right of coercion; that those who have not financial acumen or military skill have no voice at all, that
such theory was a Tyranny, and then reversed his position by creating a government that did just that. These men all gave lip service to the hazards of encroachment, despotism, and ultimate revolution should the People rise up in indignation, but sloppily created a document whereby it was possible for ambitious men to obtain their desires. Contrary to Jefferson’s assertion that the Constitution was a “chain” with which to bind such men down, it was a bloodied red carpet by which none but a vigilant and jealous citizenry could remove. There are so many loopholes and vaguely written constraints in it that collectivism has been driven through as a freight train.
During the reign of the Alien and Sedition Acts, Jefferson was appalled at the seeming about face of John Adams, as others like Alexander Hamilton and George Washington. Jefferson was socially and politically naïve to have sat through the convention from France, discussing the various issues with James and other delegates, and not have realized that
these men never changed their position, but had concealed their intent for converting the Union to a Democratic Republic, and distending it through positive interpretations to their own ambition. Franklin, however, readily recognized what Adams was after, and forestalled his exposure to monarchical operations during their ambassadorship to France. Their ambitions were exposed in
The Philadelphia Aurora, initially owned and operated by Franklin’s grandson, Benjamin Bache. Bache died in prison from neglect of malaria, at the hands of John Adams and his Sedition Act. Adams had despised Franklin for many years, and carried on a vendetta because of Franklin’s interposition, preventing Adams from obtaining his ambition to convert the Constitutional Republic into a Constitutional Monarchy. It was Bache, exposing the malfeasance of Washington and Adams, that ultimately drove both from the Presidency. Both men had always supported hereditary claim to the Presidency of the Federal Republic of America. The ultimate intent of these men was to return the American government to the British form, with they themselves as the new aristocracy.
What many citizens do not know about Washington’s term in office is he refused to remunerate the French for their War assistance, as per agreements made by ambassador Franklin. (
American Aurora pp34,408) Since those French funds spent on military hardware were made by way of loans from the Rothchild’s banking system and backed up by the property of the aristocracy, this action bankrupted the French government. Public education tells us Louis the XVI lost his head to the French Revolution. But this is misleading. He was guillotined because helping the American’s achieve independence bankrupted the country. (
American Aurora pp509, 516) The economy collapsed and the people of France, having idolized the new system of American government expounded by ambassador Franklin, rioted against the aristocracy, precipitating the bloodiest (40,000 executed) of European Revolutions to that time. The backlash of Washington’s default began with a fiction of war with the French, and the Jacobin movement that spread to America.
Thomas Paine, returned to America in 1802, having spent eleven months in jail at the behest of Governor Morris, minister to France, wrote open letters to the American people. Paine as Bache, also took them to task, albeit after the fact:
“…a faction, acting in disguise, was rising in America; they had lost sight of first principles. They were beginning to contemplate government as a profitable monopoly, and the people as hereditary property. It is, therefore, no wonder that the Rights of Man was attacked by that faction, and its author continually abused. But let them go on; give them rope enough and they will put an end to their own insignificance. There is too much common sense and independence in America to be long the dupe of any faction, foreign or domestic.
But, in the midst of the freedom we enjoy, the licentiousness of the papers called Federal (and I know not why they are called so, for they are in their principles anti-federal and despotic), is a dishonour to the character of the country, and an injury to its reputation and importance abroad. They represent the whole people of America as destitute of public principle and private manners.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P504)
Unfortunately for us, the common sense permeating Colonial America has since dissipated. Our reputation has been disintegrating since the Convention of 1787. In the wake of the disastrous administrations of Washington, Adams, and a lesser degree Madison, The Federal Republic of America lost all its allies in Europe. When James Monroe took office, he had the odious task of rebuilding those relations. His first effort to that end was to institute a policy of
non-intervention, which has been slandered as the policy of isolationism by the
Government
Mandated
Opiate consortium. These malcontents are the mechanics who operate the world's
Matrix machine.
In 1805 Paine published an open letter to the American citizenry outlining the Federal Constitution’s errors. I present here only portions more relevant:
“The Constitution formed by the Convention of 1776, of which Benjamin Franklin (the greatest and most useful man America has yet produced), was president, had many good points in it which were overthrown by the Convention of 1790, under the pretence of making the Constitution conformable to that of the United States; as if the forms and periods of election for a territory extensive as that of the United States is could become a rule for a single state.
The principal defect in the Constitution of 1776 was that it was subject, in practice, to too much precipitancy; but the groundwork of that Constitution was good. The present Constitution appears to me to be clogged with inconsistencies of a hazardous tendency, as a supposed remedy against a precipitancy that might not happen. Investing any individual, by whatever name or official title he may be called, with a negative over the formation of the laws, is copied from the English Government, without ever perceiving the inconsistency and absurdity of it, when applied to the representative system, or understanding the origin of it in England.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P526)
“This negativing power in the hands of an individual ought to be constitutionally abolished. It is a dangerous power. There is no prescribing rules for the use of it. It is discretionary and arbitrary; and the will and temper of the person at any time possessing it, is its only rule.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P527)
“We are not a conquered people; we know no conqueror; and the negativing power used by kings in England is for the defence of the personal and family prerogatives of the successors of the conqueror against the Parliament and the people. What is all this to us? We know no prerogatives but what belong to the sovereignty of ourselves.
At the time this Constitution was formed, there was a great departure from the principles of the Revolution, among those who then assumed the lead, and the country was grossly imposed upon. This accounts for some inconsistencies that are to be found in the present Constitution, among which is the negativing power inconsistently copied from England.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P528)
“Patronage has a natural tendency to increase the public expense by the temptation it leads to (unless in the hands of a wise man like Franklin) to multiply offices within the gift or appointment of that patronage. John Adams, in his Administration, went upon the plan of increasing offices and officers. He expected by thus increasing his patronage, and making numerous appointments, that he should attach a numerous train of adherents to him who would support his measures and his future election. He copied this from the corrupt system of England; and he closed his midnight labours by appointing sixteen new unnecessary judges, at an expense to the public of $32,000 annually. John counted only on one side of the case.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P530)
“The complaint respecting the Senate is the length of its duration, being four years. The sage Franklin has said, 'Where annual election ends, tyranny begins'; … When a man ceases to be accountable to those who elected him, and with whose public affairs he is entrusted, he ceases to be their representative, and is put in a condition of being their despot. He becomes the representative of nobody but himself.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P531)
“The Senate is an imitation of what is called the House of Lords in England, and which Chesterfield, who was a member of it, and therefore knew it, calls 'the Hospital of Incurables'. The Senate in Pennsylvania is not quite a hospital of incurables, but it took almost four years to bring it to a state of convalescence….William (the Conqueror), having made the conquest, dispossessed the owners of their lands, and divided those lands among the chiefs of the plundering army he brought with him, and from hence arose what is called the House of Lords.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P532)
“This is consistent with the original establishment of the House of Lords, for it was originally composed of robbers. This is aristocracy. This is one of the pillars of John Adams's 'stupendous fabric of human invention'. A privilege for house-breaking, highwayrobbing, horse-stealing and robbing of churches! John Adams knew but little of the origin and practice of the Government of England.”(The Thomas Paine Reader p533)
“The Constitution of 1776 was conformable to the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of Rights, which the present Constitution is not; for it makes artificial distinctions among men in the right of suffrage, which the principles of equity know nothing of; neither is it consistent with sound policy.” (The Thomas Paine Reader P534)
Those who declaim the contemporary departure from Constitutional government are ignorant of the Revolutionary history, the motives and actions of the Founders who produced the “worthless scrap of paper” Hamilton so disparaged. They do not realize that what they admire and esteem for being lost is the Union of States, the very form of government the South sought to maintain by the Civil War (which also was a prediction of the Anti-Federalist patriots) under the banner of the Confederate flag. This Federal Republic they created is still laboring under the ignominy and dishonor begun at the close of the Revolutionary War when the despotic government formed at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 changed forever the face of Liberty.
I commend to the reader’s review selections from the Anti-Federalist papers and their response to the Constitution’s adoption:
“But in a government consisting of but a few members, elected for long periods, and far removed from the observation of the people, but few changes in the ordinary course of elections take place among the members. They become in some measure a fixed body, and often inattentive to the public good, callous, selfish, and the fountain of corruption. To prevent these evils, and to force a principle of pure animation into the federal government, which will be formed much in this last manner mentioned, and to produce attention, activity, and a diffusion of knowledge in the community, we ought to establish among others the principle of rotation. Even good men in office, in time, imperceptibly lose sight of the people, and gradually fall into measures prejudicial to them.” #63
“To the authority of Montesquieu, I shall add that of Mr. De Lolme, whose disquisition on government is allowed to be deep, solid, and ingenious . . . . 'It is not only necessary,' [says he] 'to take from the legislature the executive power which would exempt them from the laws; but they should not have even a hope of being ever able to arrogate to themselves that power.' To remove this hope from their expectation, it would have been proper, not only to have previously laid down, in a declaration of rights, that these powers should be forever separate and incommunicable; but the frame of the proposed constitution should have had that separation religiously in view, through all its parts. It is manifest this was not the object of its framers; but, that on the contrary there is a studied mixture of them in the senate as necessary to erect it into that potent aristocracy which it must infallibly produce.
In pursuit of this daring object, than which no greater calamity can be brought upon the people, another egregious error in constitutional principles is committed. I mean that of dividing the executive powers between the senate and president.” #64
“I revere the characters of some of the gentlemen that composed the convention at Philadelphia, yet I think they were human, and subject to imposition and error, as well as the rest of mankind. You lost eight or ten years of your lives and labor by the last war, and you were left at last with your debts and encumbrances on you, and numbers of you were soon after the close of it, sued and harassed for them. Your persons have been put into a loathsome prison, and others of you have had your property sold for taxes, and sometimes for one tenth of its former and actual value and you now pay very grievous and heavy taxes, double and treble what you paid before the war; and should you adopt this new government, your taxes will be great, increased to support their.., servants and retainers, who will be multiplied upon you to keep you in obedience, and collect their duties, taxes, impositions, and excises. Some of you may say the rich men were virtuous in the last war; yes, my countrymen, they had reason then to be so! Our liberty then was in dispute with a mighty and powerful tyrant, and it was for their interest to promote and carry on the opposition, as long as they could stay at home and send the common people into the field to fight their battles. After the war began, they could not with decency recede, for the sword and enemy were at the very entrance of their gates. The case is greatly altered now; you conquered the enemy, and the rich men now think to subdue you by their wiles and arts, or make you, or persuade you, to do it yourselves. Their aim, I perceive, is now to destroy that liberty which you set up as a reward for the blood and treasure you expended in the pursuit of and establishment of it. They well know that open force will not succeed at this time, and have chosen a safer method, by offering you a plan of a new Federal Government, contrived with great art, and shaded with obscurity, and recommended to you to adopt; which if you do, their scheme is completed, the yoke is fixed on your necks, and you will be undone, perhaps for ever, and your boasted liberty is but a sound, Farewell! Be wise, be watchful, guard yourselves against the dangers that are concealed in this plan of a new Federal Government.”#40
The face of American politics that appears in the newspapers, journals, and archives of the post revolutionary period is identical to Washington politics of our time. It has never changed. The only change to this scene of blood, terror, and ruin will happen when the citizens of this country come together in common cause, as our forefathers did in 1775, and abolish the system of government in Washington and the models of constitutions, to voluntarily support the Union they devoted themselves to establish with the Revolution. Spooner in his disquisition was correct:
“…all governments though the best on earth in other respects—are nevertheless tyrannies to that portion of the people—whether few or many—who are compelled to support them against their will.” (No Treason P17)
“…there is not the slightest probability that there is a single man in the country, who both understands what the Constitution really is, and sincerely supports it for what it really is. The ostensible supporters of the Constitution, like the ostensible supporters of most other governments, are made up of three classes, viz.:
1. Knaves, a numerous and active class, who see in the government an instrument which they can use for their own aggrandizement or wealth.
2. Dupes—a large class, no doubt—each of whom, because he is allowed one voice out of millions in deciding what he may do with his own person and his own property, and because he is permitted to have the same voice in robbing, enslaving, and murdering others, that others have in robbing, enslaving, and murdering himself, is stupid enough to imagine that he is a 'free man,' a 'sovereign'; that this is 'a free government'; 'a government of equal rights,' 'the best government on earth,' and such like absurdities.
3. A class who have some appreciation of the evils of government, but either do not see how to get rid of them, or do not choose to so far sacrifice their private interests as to give themselves seriously and earnestly to the work of making a change.” (No Treason P26)
It will never happen by working within the system now entrenched.
"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete."—Buckminster Fuller
If by now you do not perceive the magnitude of our enmeshment in this
Matrix called the
Federal Republic of America, there is little hope past despotic slavery.
SethSmee
REFERENCES
The Thomas Paine Reader, 1987, Foot & Kramnick
American Aurora, 1997, Morgan & Rosenfeld
Declaration of Independence, 1776, Representatives in General Congress, USofA
The Origin of Totalitarianism, 1973, Hannah Arendt
The Mind of the Founder, 1981, Meyers
The Law, 1995, Richman
Conspiracy in Philadelphia, 2004, North
The Federalist Papers
The Anti-Federalist Papers
No Treason, 1867, Lysander Spooner
* “Every Body cries, a Union is absolutely necessary, but when they come to the Manner and Form of the Union, their weak Noddles are perfectly distracted.” Letter to Peter Collinson (29 December 1754)
