WAR ON RELIGION BY LEFT AND SPLC

A War Of Religion

From over the transom; propositional nation and constitutional folks take heed:

“A brilliant friend who wishes to remain nameless reminds us why incidents like Charlottesville are all too inevitable in a nation with a hard left high command, an army of portable paid thugs, and a vast population of sentimental liberals who believe they stand only for truth and ‘social justice.’

“”The left could care less about this issue (Confederate statuary), as they could care less about any of their issues. “The issue is never the issue, the issue is always revolution”. This is why they got gay marriage, then just moved on to Trans rights while shrugging off 50 gays getting killed in Orlando. When the transgender fight is over it’ll be pedo rights or whatever.

… Very soon there will be a push to get rid of the entire American Revolution and all of the founding fathers. Jefferson will be first, but Washington won’t be far behind.
Overriding all of this is the push to declare all of conservatism illegal. All religions not part of the cult of leftism are hate speech. Any support of the USA as a country is hateful, bigoted and evil. You supporting your own existence or political power is racism, nationalism and white supremacy.

The left has no limits. It’s vital to understand that. No battle they pick is over the stated issue. Each is merely a step towards the goal of eradicating Western Civilization. They’ve set up a self reinforcing system of rewards, whereby SJWs out bid each other to come up with new ways to be offended. Thus it’s become an ever more radical movement. It’s not about the monuments. Of course glorifying slavery is bad. But should we not then tear down the Pyramids? Trust me, there is NO vestige of Western Civilization that could not be destroyed on the same premise. Every Castle in Europe occupied by a despot, every Church, every document, every classic of literature, etc. In world where a few degrees of separation join all things, guilt by association can be used to criticize anything, because its all a degree or two away from something that can be demonized. Look what’s happening to Football; to the definition of family and gender, to every holiday. Anything can be destroyed if the standard is that it’s related to something bad. Guess what that includes? Everything. SJWs in South Africa are going after Isaac Newton and Gravity as “western colonial science”. Get it? Nothing is off limits. No. Single. Thing.

This is about enshrining the left as The One True Religion. They will replace everything with their own cultish iconography. They will likewise replace all ideas with their own. The fight over the Google memo is identical to this fight. It’s about declaring all things non-leftist outside the scope of even debate. This is not about the confederacy. That’s yet another in a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long list of fronts. It’s about the existence of anything outside of leftism. It’s about eliminating debate and installing a global Religion of Leftism. And make no mistake, that religion plans on replacing monuments, books, science and facts, liberty, the white population, the concept of natural rights, the rule of law, free speech, Christianity, the USA, Europe and all of Western Civilization. In fact, if you defend any of those things, you are a Nationalist, a white supremacist and a bigot. You must go. You must be replaced.

Many many a totalitarian ideology goes under the banner, “Join or Die”. This is no different. And the left has done this before, many times. Pol Pot, The French Revolution, Mao, Lenin. The push to erase history and start over as a means of revolution is not new by any means. And if you think they have some limit, look to these past revolutions to see that they just don’t. The ideology is self-reinforcing towards runaway radicalism. The only thing that stops it is pushback prior to their take over or burnout after it takes over and fails. It has no internal limits.

So while I agree with the Rabbi and have zero interest in defending Nazis or the Confederacy, I know that this has almost nothing to do with those things to the left. Those just create convenient foils. The left is filled with strawmen – they paint all of us as Nazi, bigoted, white male oppressors. Finding the occasional real life one is great for the left and they will use it to pretend all their other strawmen are likewise real. Understand that Marxism does not study policy and governance the way that conservatives and libertarians do. They study propaganda, power and revolutions. They are masters of it. Which is why repeated failure at governance never deters the next revolution.

Leftism. The One True Religion. Join or Die. That’s their goal.”

Advertisements

Republic-vs-Democracy IS THERE A DIFFERENCE

FAIR USE NOTICE: This material and or video may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes only. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
politicalvelcraft.org

 TO AVOID PLAGERISM I WILL ACKNOWLEDGE THE USE UNDER OF THIS ARTICLE UNDER COMMON USAGE LAWS

Republic-vs-Democracy

“There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution.”
President John Adams ~ October 2, 1780


Jefferson tyranny resistance

“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”
― Thomas Jefferson

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”

SUMMARY
In the Pledge of Allegiancewe all pledge allegiance to our Republic, not to a democracy. “Republic” is the proper description of our government, not “democracy.” I invite you to join me in raising public awareness regarding that distinction.A republic and a democracy are identical in every aspect except one. In a republic the sovereignty is in each individual person. In a democracy the sovereignty is in the group.

Republic. That form of government in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. [NOTE: The word “people” may be either plural or singular. In a republic the group only has advisory powers; the sovereign individual is free to reject the majority group-think. USA/exception: if 100% of a jury convicts, then the individual loses sovereignty and is subject to group-think as in a democracy.]

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. [NOTE: In a pure democracy, 51% beats 49%. In other words, the minority has no rights. The minority only has those privileges granted by the dictatorship of the majority.]


The distinction between our Republic and a democracy is not an idle one. It has great legal significance.The Constitution guarantees to every state a Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4). No state may join the United States unless it is a Republic. Our Republic is one dedicated to “liberty and justice for all.” Minority individual rights are the priority. The people have natural rights instead of civil rights. The people are protected by the Bill of Rights from the majority. One vote in a jury can stop all of the majority from depriving any one of the people of his rights; this would not be so if the United States were a democracy. (see People’s rights vs Citizens’ rights)

In a pure democracy 51 beats 49[%]. In a democracy there is no such thing as a significant minority: there are no minority rights except civil rights (privileges) granted by a condescending majority. Only five of the U.S. Constitution’s first ten amendments apply to Citizens of the United States. Simply stated, a democracy is a dictatorship of the majority. Socrates was executed by a democracy: though he harmed no one, the majority found him intolerable.

SOME DICTIONARY DEFINITIONSGovernment. ….the government is but an agency of the state, distinguished as it must be in accurate thought from its scheme and machinery of government. ….In a colloquial sense, the United States or its representatives, considered as the prosecutor in a criminal action; as in the phrase, “the government objects to the witness.” [Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 625]

Government; Republican government. One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people, either directly, or through representatives chosen by the people, to whome those powers are specially delegated. In re Duncan, 139 U.S. 449, 11 S.Ct. 573, 35 L.Ed. 219; Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. (21 Wall.) 162, 22 L.Ed. 627. [Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, p. 626]

Democracy. That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in and is exercised by the whole body of free citizens directly or indirectly through a system of representation, as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy. Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, pp. 388-389.

Note: Black’s Law Dictionary, Fifth Edition, can be found in any law library and most law offices.

EXAMPLE
Democratic Form of Government: An environmental organization proposes a bill for the ballot that every individual should reduce his water household usage by 25%. To assure that this goal is met, the government, or private sector, will monitor every individual’s household water consumption rate. If an individual does not meet the goal, his first offense is $500 fine. Second offense is $750 fine and 30 days community service. Third offense is $1,500 fine and 30 days imprisonment. Fourth offense is $1,750 fine and 90 days imprisonment. Fifth offense is a felony (1-year imprisonment) and $2,000 fine.

The people argue this environmental issue back and forth. They argue the pros and cons of the issue. This great debate is held at town hall meetings. Strong opinions are on both sides of the matter. One side preaches, “It is for the common good!” The other side rebuttals, “This is control and not freedom, and lost of choice!” Election day occurs. The people go to the ballot box to settle the problem. The majority won by a vote of 51% whereas the minority lost with a vote of 49%. The minority is ignored. The majority celebrates while the minority jeers in disappointment. Since the majority won, the bill goes in effect. As a result of the majority winning, every individual must reduce his household water usage by 25%. For the reason that the majority has mandatory powers in a democracy. Those who wish to go against the collective (whole body politic) will be punished accordingly. The minority has neither voice nor rights to refuse to accept the dictatorial majority. Everything is mandatory in a democracy. This brings dictatorship and lividity to the realm.

Republican Form of Government: An environmental organization proposes a bill for the ballot that every individual should reduce his water household usage by 25%. To assure that this goal is met, the government, or private sector, will monitor every individual’s household water consumption rate. If an individual does not meet the goal, his first offense is $500 fine. Second offense is $750 fine and 30 days community service. Third offense is $1,500 fine and 30 days imprisonment. Fourth offense is $1,750 fine and 90 days imprisonment. Fifth offense is a felony (1-year imprisonment) and $2,000 fine.

The people argue this environmental issue back and forth. They argue the pros and cons of the issue. This great debate is held at town hall meetings. Strong opinions are on both sides of the matter. One side preaches, “It is for the common good!” The other side rebuttals, “This is control and not freedom, and lost of choice!” Election day occurs. The people go to the ballot box to settle the problem. The majority won by a vote of 51% whereas the minority lost with a vote of 49%. The minority may have lost, but not all is gone. The majority celebrates while the minority jeers in disappointment. Since the majority won, the bill goes in effect. As a result of the majority winning, it is advisory that every individual reduce his household water usage by 25%. For the reason that the majority has advisory powers in a republic. Bearing in mind that each individual is equally sovereign in a republic, he is free to reject the majority. He may choose to follow the majority and subject himself to the rule, or he may choose not to follow the majority and not subject himself to the rule. The minority has a voice and rights to refuse to accept the majority. Everything is advisory in a republic. This brings liberty and peace to the realm.

COMMENTSNotice that in a Democracy, the sovereignty is in the whole body of the free citizens. The sovereignty is not divided to smaller units such as individual citizens. To solve a problem, only the whole body politic is authorized to act. Also, being citizens, individuals have duties and obligations to the government. The government’s only obligations to the citizens are those legislatively pre-defined for it by the whole body politic.

In a Republic, the sovereignty resides in the people themselves, whether one or many. In a Republic, one may act on his own or through his representatives as he chooses to solve a problem. Further, the people have no obligation to the government; instead, the government being hired by the people, is obliged to its owner, the people.

The people own the government agencies. The government agencies own the citizens. In the United States we have a three-tiered cast system consisting of people —> government agencies —> and citizens.

The people did “ordain and establish this Constitution,” not for themselves, but “for the United States of America.” In delegating powers to the government agencies the people gave up none of their own. (See Preamble of U.S. Constitution). This adoption of this concept is why the U.S. has been called the “Great Experiment in self government.” The People govern themselves, while their agents (government agencies) perform tasks listed in the Preamble for the benefit of the People. The experiment is to answer the question, “Can self-governing people coexist and prevail over government agencies that have no authority over the People?”

The citizens of the United States are totally subject to the laws of the United States (See 14th Amendment of U.S. Constitution). NOTE: U.S. citizenship did not exist until July 28, 1868.

Actually, the United States is a mixture of the two systems of government (Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law). The People enjoy their God-given natural rights in the Republic. In a democracy, the Citizens enjoy only government granted privileges (also known as civil rights).

There was a great political division between two major philosophers, Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes was on the side of government. He believed that sovereignty was vested in the state. Locke was on the side of the People. He believed that the fountain of sovereignty was the People of the state. Statists prefer Hobbes. Populists choose Locke. In California, the Government Code sides with Locke. Sections 11120 and 54950 both say, “The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them.” The preambles of the U.S. and California Constitutions also affirm the choice of Locke by the People.

It is my hope that the U.S. will always remain a Republic, because I value individual freedom.

Thomas Jefferson said that liberty and ignorance cannot coexist.* Will you help to preserve minority rights by fulfilling the promise in the Pledge of Allegiance to support the Republic? Will you help by raising public awareness of the difference between the Republic and a democracy?

* “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization,
it expects what never was and never will be.”
Thomas Jefferson, 1816.

MILITA’S a reproduction of the orginial

Published: January 29, 2016 at 5:05 pm

Washington, DC (TFC) – It’s the question that’s popping up all over Facebook. It’s also the question that proves the militia movement, as it is today, is doomed. The definition of insanity is to repeat the same behavior and expect different results. Static positions and stand-offs are referred to as “last stands” because when they are over, the people involved are either in a cage or a grave. This article may upset many within the movement, but it needs to be said before more life is wasted.

The stand-off scenario is just a symptom of a disease spreading like cancer through the militias. Some in the militia movement have taken to flocking around those with a flare for racist rhetoric, over-the-top Facebook leadership, and sensationalist behavior. They follow the pronouncements of these individuals and exist inside an echo chamber where those who disagree are shut out. All of these things are crippling to a movement attempting to establish itself.

There had been a concerted effort within the movement to stamp out racism. Lately, it’s rearing its ugly head again and propelling the most flamboyant racists into positions of influence. Racists are not smart. They are people who need to over-generalize and over-simplify to process the things around them. This isn’t some method of mocking racists. It’s scientific fact. Racists aren’t bright. These people should not be leaders. They certainly shouldn’t be at the helm of organizations where life and liberty are at stake.

Over-the-top leadership comes in the form of those willing to pronounce how ready they are to die for the cause. American culture has equated dying for a belief to an act of heroism. It’s not. It’s waste. It’s a waste of life, a waste of resources, and a waste of time. A large percentage of this overtly militant talk comes from people who have monetized the movement. They engage in this type of speech in YouTube videos or articles or podcasts because they know that’s what the movement wants to hear. The movement wants to be reassured that victory is right around the corner and those that die will be martyrs sacrificed on the altar of freedom to reclaim America. That type of rhetoric gets more clicks than informing readers of the truth: the militia movement is in its infancy and does not have the skill set or strategic sense to take on the federal government. These people who rant and play on emotion to induce anger-driven shares of their content are filling bodybags.

Several of the organizations which are seen as leaders within the movement suggested the US Government was going to use “Delta Force” or some other elite military unit to attack those in Oregon. It’s sensationalist. It’s designed to convince the reader the US government needs to deploy the US military’s most elite unit to deal with a group of men who didn’t think far enough ahead to bring food when they volunteered to place themselves under siege. Elite units are not needed to take down people who willing pin themselves down and allow their opposition to choose the time and place of the battle. Any local SWAT team will be able to handle that.

The echo chamber that has formed around the militia movement is staggering. Dissenting voices are removed. A person needs to conform or they are shut out.

The end result of these four critical issues in the movement is a group of people led by the less intelligent, inflamed to anger by those profiting from it, encouraged by organizations that don’t have a clue what they are talking about, and lacking an outside voice to provide a reality check. Does this sound like a cohesive paramilitary organization?

The American militia movement has deteriorated and been led astray by those who seek to use it for their own ends. It has lost its tactical edge because it is following people who want to be internet famous and be seen as leaders of a revolution. They’re more interested in talking about than they are in preparing for it. I know of several organizations and individuals who still maintain their tactical wits. They aren’t livestreaming their conversations and they don’t pay yearly dues to an supposedly militant organization via credit card. Think about the fact that the “security detail” in Oregon didn’t have the common sense to stop people from livestreaming conversations. The FBI has the internet too. They didn’t know it was tactically unsound to provide their opposition with a detailed inventory of their supplies. They didn’t know it was bad form to adopt a position that could be completely and totally controlled by their opposition. These are not the actions of a force that is ready to go toe-to-toe with the most powerful government in the world. These aren’t even the actions of  a force ready to go toe-to-toe with a decent community paintball team.

Many within the movement have visions of some great heroic feat restoring liberty to the nation. Here in the real word, that isn’t how it works. The federal government is seen by many militias as the enemy. A matured movement would understand their enemy. They would understand that it has redundant command and control aspects and that no single engagement will bring it to its knees. The US government has a plan to maintain continuity of government even if a nuclear war destroys the major cities and kills half of the population. Is it even remotely feasible that some Alamo-style siege can bring it to its knees?

The reality of what it would take to bring the federal government down is something so horrible, nobody who understands what it would take wants it to happen. It would be a lengthy civil insurrection lasting years. Tens of millions of dead. Bombings that hit civilian targets. Rampant famine and disease. Snipers that shoot people trying to make it across the street simply to take their supplies. Mass graves. War crimes unlike anything the US has ever seen. The complete breakup of the nation. This is the scene that will take place before a government collapse. It would make Rwanda and Bosnia look like a simple bar fight.  The reality of what it would take to force the US government to make concessions is almost as bad and involves murderous tactics on a scale never seen here before. If you expected the Oregon situation to turn out any differently, you probably need to stop reading blogs written by people who fear-monger for profit and start reading some history books.

Those who write these fear-mongering blogs calling for armed action while safe behind a screen, are the movements politicians. They help shape policy and planning. What would you think of a politician that helped place people in harm’s way without the resources to back them up? How many of those blogs call Hillary Clinton a traitor for engaging in the same behavior during the Benghazi fiasco?

Calling for the militant overthrow of the government is not a game. It’s not a hobby. It certainly isn’t a business. It’s something that has life and death consequences. This movement is sending people into a situation they aren’t ready for without the tools or training to win, and it’s all being done for the sake of YouTube clicks. The people in this movement need to take a look at their leadership before they end up being the next ones bleeding to death in the snow for engaging in an unwinnable mission.