The Peaceful Transfer of Violent Power

[primemignonite]

With regard to author Richman, Graham allows to us his opinion that "Well he seems to have been around for a while and is very radical. . . ."

A fair assessment and charge, I expect, but so-too were The Founders most "radical"!

This certainly, when they declared and waged open war "most unholy", against God's direct representative on earth, one King George III. (So much for Romans XIII.)

(Max; nix?)

Talk about "radical"! Now THERE one had more than just a bit of it sure, for any one man's opinions on it!

So what?

"Just Rights" as according-to "Divine Providence", and the required "separation" to be done, was by it so-accomplished.

How else could it have been, by sneezing at the Red Coats? One could have achieved greater results by flatulating at a hurricane, and expecting Mother Nature on account, to QUAKE in her very boots!

Here, the raw point we come-to is, that, sometimes radicalism is a healthy and necessary thing needing to be called-upon, to the ends of attainment of real results! It was necessarily and factually the tool which brought us relief from the innumerable impositions done us by the King!

The very same principles, as then smiled-upon by our Creator as immortally enshrined within our magnificent

Declaration of Independence

and to our eventual, great success, DO-STILL-APPLY-TODAY, with no changes to be made!!!

As-is! NOT one dot! NOT one tittle!

To begin a thing rightly, one begins at the beginning not the end, nor at somewhere in-between.

A really weird notion, isn't it, patriots and . . . "patriots" of reportage?

SUCH is the result of decades of perverted, to-purpose "education", as now to be done against us by our brand new, stealthy Kingship In Black! (Or, halfway-so.)

It is, in-truth, much that was mis-direction, mis-information and dis-information that brought us and our former abilities to think independantly, down. Lacking it, how else can logical concenses be arrived-at, and be solidified and stuck-to? The correct answer asserts itself on it's legs, upright!.

I, for one, at least, AM NOT AMUSED, and those more logical should hope 'not', but I fear 'so' it is, with tragically too many. Prove me wrong!

Comments, if they be constructive rather than otherwise, are invited.

James

From the near-homonym file:
http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?q=title&search=
http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?q=tittle&search=

[scott]

It does seem that Mr Richman , Scott, and yourself despise the constitution as no more than an agreement between merchants to protect their interests and to levy taxes on the people.

Sorry but your conclusion is incorrect. I think the Constitution was a fine document as it was written insofar as it applied the brakes on the growth of federal power for a while. Of course the 3/5 compromise was an immoral mistake. But rather than adding the 13th amendment they should have just removed the 3/5 clause and continued the momentum of whittling down the state rather than perpetually growing it.

Just look at what came down the pike: income tax and prohibition for example.

-Scott

[graham]

Hi Murilo I thought your post was right on the mark.

Here we are hashing and thrashing about how lousy the government here in the U S is . How much greed and corruption there is and how bloated the government has become,I agree. It could be much better and fairer than it is but it could be worse.
At least there is hope and opportunity in the U S if one chooses to take advantage of it.

I have mentioned that I am not well versed in American politics and it's history.
I was not even born in this country, I just tell it as I see it.

This is a large country with large population today and the world has changed so much since the time of the founding fathers.
It is a very dangerous world and we do have many enemies that would like to see something like another civil war or a collapse of our economic system.

So violent power is just what we need sometimes .
Wasn't that how we got rid of Hitler ?

Graham

[graham]

James wrote :

Here, the raw point we come-to is, that, sometimes radicalism is a healthy and necessary thing needing to be called-upon, to the ends of attainment of real results! It was necessarily and factually the tool which brought us relief from the innumerable impositions done us by the King!

The very same principles, as then smiled-upon by our Creator as immortally enshrined within our magnificent

Declaration of Independence

Yes James I agree but the question is . "Are we there yet" ?

Graham

P S .I think I'll stay away from "off topic" for a while, I could be getting in over my head :-)

[ovyyus]

So violent power is just what we need sometimes...

Doesn't every culture impose a set of rules upon its citizens? No one is asked to follow their tribal law, as though it was optional. They are told, and then forced, to comply or they suffer the consequences. That seems to hold true for all forms of governance from the mighty US to small Aboriginal tribes. Don't they all impose some form of violent power as a means to maintain some form of social order?

[primemignonite]

Graham,

You wisely asked "Are we there yet" ?

And I would answer with a 'I don't know. We'll see.'

Also, if I had a vote in the matter, I would vote that you stick around. Anyone having a considered, constructive opinion, cannot possibly get in over his head, I believe. It is our American way. (Ideally.)

AND . . . as-to Scott's assertion that Graham put-forth a "conclusion" of some sort, it was not one in-fact, having been but a strongly expressed observation. By means of his, Graham's, use of the conditioning term "seems", he concluded nothing, rather, only having observed strongly. The assertion of Scott's was specious though I reasonably suppose, one un-intended. These little fine points do have a way of getting past us, all of us.

I think it's certain that Scott does not despise the Constitution, just as he writes, whereas I, in-essence, do, being firmly-with the Patrick Henry camp, believing it to have been an out-and-out plot to work as A TREASON against the Declaration (and as well against The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union which formative document was in perfect conformance to the Declaration of Independence.) done by the Tory mercantilist class, traitors-all to Henry's true "Sweet Liberty", headed-up by the bastard Hamilton and his pro-central banking rogue pack.

(Have we YET to draw our fair conclusions regarding the ultimate wiseness of embracing central banking still? If not, then why not, given the miserable dissipation we've witnessed and do suffer by, compliments of it's proponents and actors, as done to us in the mere, past few months?)

Vanquished into a correct, necessary and just oblivion (and eventual suicide I believe), was Nicholas Biddle, this good thing done by an authentically great President who took-up the challenge early-on, and triumphed absolutely - one Andrew Jackson.

(WHY do you think 'they' put him front-and-center, on their twenty dollar bill? Because they know he would have despised it! Such is their vindictiveness that originates always from the brimstone pits they are headed-for!)

This same vanquishment of the present CB vermin, needs badly to be repeated NOW, once again.

(WHY is their any mystery whatever remaining to this??? Is it to be the silent, huddling mice of the corner, praying to their Mouse God for the cat to pass-on-by, ostensibly to take no notice of them? Apparently, this IS what we have here, as our own situation. It is not honorable behavior; it is cowardice, is what it is!)

Graham, our Constitution was a thing hewn out of Hell's materials, IN SECRET SESSION!

The Declaration was not.

The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union was not, so, why then the Constitution?

The conclusion is inevitable: they were being devious because they had to be!

Just think, if Jefferson had somehow caught wind of what Hamilton and his money allies were up to, what would have happened if old number three-to-be had shown up during those secret sessions, there in Philadelphia?

It would have all FAILED, is what!

With him back, in concert with the Anti-Federalists, they, the Pro-Federalists, could not have withstood the "Anti" blow torch blast, and there would not have been ANY Constitution with which to fiddle, finesse and diddle-with, in order to enslave us all to the Kingdom of Lucre! (to wit: "and subject to . . ." - 14th Amendment!)

Their original charge given them by their States, was to convene and touch-up the Articles where and as needed. Instead, they worked-at the essential overthrow of it, and substituted their purposely-flawed Constitution - a thing designed to fail and to become a perversion by successive changes and additions, by means of amendment, all of that now coalesced into an effective low-level tyranny, of which true brand no man dares speak! (From that, DO set-aside this indiscrete, too bold author?)

"barksalot" and "erik" seem to be onto the right scent alright of this rotted condition, of present.

Mere nibbling around the edges of this dark conjuration, as it has now become, will get nothing more done that what is intended for us to do: nothing and to "obey"!

I continue to be "not amused"!

What say ye?

James

[murilo]

Grahan, hi!
You said:''Hi Murilo I thought your post was right on the mark.''
As just a newspaper reader, I'm not a specialist in nothing, but there are things I would like to be wrong.
Mixed to political environment is the weapons and army business that has large importance in some countries, here called as Violent Power.
They need to use their means to go on, you know!
And they become masters in people mannipulations!
People is kept under the culture of hate, fear and with disposition to die, kill and pay everything!
( This mannipulation hapens even if one is not conscious about! )
Cheers!
Murilo

[primemignonite]

Bill,

I posted my latest big screed before I saw what you had added.

You asked "Doesn't every culture impose a set of rules upon its citizens? . . .", to which I would respond in-the-affirmative, mostly.

And then, this ". . . They are told, and then forced, to comply or they suffer the consequences. . . ." which is obvious and true on it's face.

And then, finishing up with ". . . That seems to hold true for all forms of governance from the mighty US to small Aboriginal tribes. Don't they all impose some form of violent power as a means to maintain some form of social order?"

As far as all that are known to me go, just as you said applies, and is of usable utility, as in a 'rutl-of-thumb', however, it has not always been thus, and thereupon hangs a tail . . .

"The Old Confederacy" was that arrangement done here, of free and independent sovereign states, brought together in friendship and ostensible perpetual union. They had just obtained victory over dear old King George III, and the Aritcles of Confederation and Perpetual Union is what the American Founders came up with. It WAS, in fact, America's First Constitution.

It intended to and succeeded at the binding of all the states together for their mutual good and protection AS THE DEFENDER of the liberties (Sweet Liberty) of the people, which had been just won by them.

It was formed and existed to this sole purpose, leaving to the states the pursuance of the objective of maximizing rights naturally inherent in men, as said in the Declaration of Independence, and, of causing the people to be safe in them, free to do their OWN GOVERNING by means of local control over their particular state representatively, and as such, fearing no overbearance possibly coming from without.

This was the plan and it worked for a few short years before the rats swarmed!

Understanding and accepting this to have been so, then I think you could understand how, that here back then, for a short time, things were uniquely differing from all other cases from ever before, or then.

No Kings. No Emperors. No taxation without TRUE re-presentation. NO Romans XIII or "rendering-up" to be done, to powers afar!

James

[ovyyus]

This was the plan and it worked for a few short years before the rats swarmed!

Understanding and accepting this to have been so, then I think you could understand how, that here back then, for a short time, things were uniquely differing from all other cases from ever before, or then.

James, I hear you. A few short years seems a very long time for any delicate ideal to survive intact under the baking jungle sun. But sooner or later the predators move in and the relentless battle continues. Nature in it's most beautiful execution is an amoral struggle with no end, yes?

[scott]

Nature in it's most beautiful execution is an amoral struggle with no end, yes?

You hit the nail on the head there Bill. There's nothing natural or moral about a monopoly of force, either by a tyrant or by the whim of factions able to sway the mobile vulgus or easily movable crowd.

Nature gives us no template for government as we know it. Nature only teaches us that there is a fundamental difference between cooperation and coercion. A distinction which is lost whenever we start talking about politics.

As Zhuangzi said "the world does not need governing; in fact it should not be governed" and "good order results spontaneously when things are let alone."

All we have to do is look around at the natural world to see this truth.

-Scott

[MrTim]

Yes, eat or be eaten. Do you try to make it as a lone predator, or form a herd and seek safety in numbers? Human equivalents are just more complex....

[scott]

No actually MrTim it's simple. You are just confusing cooperation and coercion.

[docfeelsgood]

Long before the government as we know it was established , there were another set of guidelines . It was called "The Ten Commandments " . people carrying guns and paying attention to those rules had little to fear from one another !!! people are much more respectfull when everyone is armed !!!! I am not a religious person myself but can say they are rules of great worth summed up nicely !!!! And it worked long before the constitution was enacted !!

so if you get caught in the neighbors hen house stealing chickens and get yer ass blown off ,,,, dont cry ta me !!!! musta deserved it or ya wouldn't have got it !!! look what happened to them Bloody Brits when they got caught in the hen house in 1776 ,,, good ole boys taught them rascals a hard lesson ,,, aint going to support some ole HO who lives in a castle across the pond !!!! then the fools came back again !!!! guess they love their ho's and castles over there ,,, still got one !!!! and due to foreighn aid we now support half the world !!!! somethin went bad wrong !!!!!! [I think it's called government !!]

"God created man ,, Colonel Colt made them EQUAL " !!

"He who beats his sword into a plowshare will be a slave to the one who doesn't " !!!!!

What say you John Collins ???????? Stewart ??????????

"Ole Hard Core Doc."

[murilo]

I thought that it wasn't necessary due to your words, but I came back to my previous msg and reiforced the word business, the real stuff.
All the best, guys... all the best!!!
Murilo

[John Collins]

Colt's great grandfather was from Bristol, England and I guess that makes him of English stock.

So it was we 'bloody Brits' against your 'good ole boys' who were just erstwhile Brits! Same difference.

We've always been a rebellious bunch. We were rebelling way before the Frenchies even thought of it. We even cut off the head of one of our Kings and there are some who are looking at our leader just now and sharpening their axes in anticipation. Whats more we don't even have a constitution and after almost a thousand years who needs it.

We can't escape out genetic inheritance! ;-)

JC