This article grew out of a speech I gave in Georgia around the year 2000. I have revised it slightly since I first published it in article form a few years ago. It is still relevant, especially in this election year. America’s infatuation with democracy is telling when one considers that the last century–the 20th–is sometimes proudly referred to as “The Century of Democracy” (aka the American Century or sometimes the Jewish Century). It is also the bloodiest and most war-torn century the world has ever seen. Is there a connection between democratic politics and governance and such rampant bloodshed?
A fundamental question hangs over the political system that few Americans want to entertain. How do we protect ourselves from tyranny operating under color of law when no political solution is at hand? Some will say we must tolerate it because the majority has spoken, the Congress has legislated, the President has executed, and the courts have adjudicated.
Leftists, socialists, and communists say “We won the election and we have a mandate from the people to govern.” They’re telling the rest of us to shut up and take whatever they decide to dish out. That’s exactly the way democracy works: the 51% majority can plunder, pillage, and even kill the minority 49%. If the minority reacts to protect themselves, then the majority charges them with “anti-government extremism” or “domestic terrorism.”
Free men don’t submit to the tyranny of clearly unconstitutional “laws” crafted by a majority. Our Founders gave us a republic in which the final say-so was to reside with the people in their capacity as citizens of the several sovereign States.
So, when faced with the raw exercise of power, what do we do? The fundamental law of self-preservation known as salus populi (translated from the Latin: “the well-being of the people is the supreme law”) trumps everything. I like to call it the law of tooth and claw. It means that when you threaten me or my family’s health and well-being, frustrate or defeat our attempts to feed, clothe, and house ourselves properly through our own labor, then we have a basic right to resist you, as we would any common thief or murderer.
Our political system is supposed to rest upon “the consent of the governed.” The elites who control the current system don’t care about the people’s consent. They don’t care what we think, or about legal or moral restrictions upon governance. They care only about power.
If the world stood right-side-up today, those who hold positions of authority on behalf of the people would be persuaded to govern well by a healthy dose of fear. They would fear the consequences of betraying the people, their masters.
As Thomas Jefferson wrote to William Stephens Smith in 1787: “… what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.”
But because the world is not right-side-up, our government uses fear against us. It makes us fear the consequences of opposition. When we do strike out against them, even in some sophomoric way (say, a brick through a Congressman’s window), they condemn “violence” and call us “extremists.” Ironically, they remain in power through violence of their own—or the very real threat of it.
Resisting these sorts of laws is not a recipe for anarchy. Many good and necessary laws are in place which we all must obey if society is to function. But a line exists that lawmakers should not dare to cross. They have crossed it many times in the past half century precisely because we no longer act like free men and women. We have done little other than complain.
Now they have finally thrown off the mask and revealed the monster underneath. How, you might ask? By finally admitting that the regime has the legal authority to kill you at any time, at any place, and for any reason it deems necessary for its own (i.e., national) security. This was begun by George W. Bush and is now being continued by Barack Obama. What’s next?
What happens if you refuse to obey some immoral, unjust, or unconstitutional “law”? They fine you or come to arrest you. What happens if you don’t pay the fine or meekly submit to arrest? They shoot you. In the end, it really is that simple: they shoot you or you shoot them.
The regime knows that we know there are few practical political solutions left. Why else would they want our guns and ammunition? I would venture a guess it’s because they do not want us shooting back.
So it has come to this. When politics fail to provide safeguards for the people’s lives, liberty, and property, then the people must seek extra-political solutions. Got any ideas where to begin?—