The Case of the Citizen Truly Stated

In the English Civil War, a group of renegade soldiers, along with political supporters in London, began demanding radical reforms like universal suffrage, religious tolerance, equality before the law and popular sovereignty. The Levellers did not last long, but they remain an important turning point in Western history. Their radical idea was that a man must consent to be governed and therefore have a say in how he is governed. This is a seminal moment in Western history. A nation would be defined by its people, while empires would be defined by their territory.

Another way to look at it is that a nation is a group of people, who decide their borders, their customs and how they will govern themselves. The consent is not just from citizen to the state, but from citizen to citizen. An empire, in contrast, is whatever land the ruler can hold and the people within it. His relationship to the people is transactional. He guards the people, enforces the rules and the people pay taxes. The people have no obligations to one another, at least in a legal sense. Their only duties are to the king as a subject, while they remain in the kingdom. L’Etat, c’est moi.

The critical thing here is that a citizen has obligations to his fellow citizens, while a subject only has obligations to his ruler. The former is the model we have had in the West for a long time now. In America, it has been the only model. All the blather about the propositional nation stuff obscures this fact in an attempt to justify mass immigration, but even within that mythological concept of America, the citizen is defined by his relationship to his fellow citizens. It’s not the government who defines the citizen. It is the citizen that defines the state. As such, the citizens get to decide who is and who is not a citizen.

That’s the problem the open borders types refuse to address. The government of a nation is just an extension of that agreement between the citizens. It’s even written into the American Constitution, right at the very beginning.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

In a nation, the government is defined by the people – literally. The people decide who is and who is not “the people” by whatever means they find agreeable. As with any contract, social or otherwise, the parties enter into it voluntarily. We don’t think of it that way, because we are born into our citizenship in most cases, but the fact that we can renounce our citizenship means it is always voluntary. Further, the fact that the state cannot revoke it means it is not a contract with the state. It is a contract with our fellow citizens.

In a land of no borders, there can be no social contract. What would be the point? If anyone can wander in and get the benefits of the contract, without first consenting to the terms of the contract and gaining the agreement of the counter party, what value can there be in citizenship? Citizenship becomes a suckers deal, just as it was in the Roman Empire when citizenship simply meant you paid taxes and had to provide men to the military. In the world of open borders, citizenship is all obligation and no benefit.

In such a world, it will not take long before the calls of patriotism fall flat. After all, what is patriotism but the moral obligation of a citizen to his fellow citizens? Patriotism is the spirit of the social contract. To their credit, the open borders crowd agrees that their vision of paradise is one where all human relations are transactional. Everyone acts in their self interest. So, why would people serve jury duty? Volunteer at their kid’s school? Serve in the military? All of these things assume a moral duty to your fellow citizens. In the borderless paradise, no one owes anyone anything.

Even in the paradise of open borders, order must be maintained and the interests of the wealthy protected. When calls to patriotism and culture are no longer tools available to the state, force is what’s left. This custodial state we see being rolled out by our rulers is not due to a breakdown of the citizens willingness to uphold their part of the social contract. It is the breakdown of the social contract that is causing the growth of the custodial state. Put another way, the state is not just failing in its obligations, it is nullifying the compact between citizens. In fact, they are obliterating the very concept of citizenship.

In response to the Leveller’s call or democratic rights, Henry Ireton responded,

No person hath a right to an interest or share in the disposing of the affairs of the kingdom, and in determining or choosing those that shall determine what laws we shall be ruled by here — no person hath a right to this, that hath not a permanent fixed interest in this kingdom.

How is this different from the arguments of the open borders proponents? They argue, that no one has a right to say who can walk into your country. They say, no one has a right to determine who is and who is not entitled to to the blessings of liberty. Ireton rejected the concept of citizenship. Those who demand open borders are doing the same thing. Instead of a king, they promise a custodial state to rule over us, to keep us safe, accountable only to those with a permanent interest in it.

46 thoughts on “The Case of the Citizen Truly Stated

  1. Pingback: Dismal Quackery | The Z Blog

  2. Pingback: The "I'm Just Going To Leave This Here" Thread - Please Add Your "Finds" - Page 59

  3. It’s an interesting relationship you describe. The state can tax you, draft you and send you to war, and even execute you for capital crimes. But at least in the US, it does have the means to take away your citizenship. The question is, then what happens to a person who is then a “non-citizen”?

    Sec. 349. [8 U.S.C. 1481]
    (a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality – (7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of title 18, United States Code, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of title 18, United States Code, or violating section 2384 of said title by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

    Official Website of the Department of Homeland Security

    • Karl,

      Great job pointing this out.

      Interesting how this directly contradicts the thinking of Thomas Jefferson about citizens needing to refresh the tree of liberty from time to time.

      Also, interesting that it is all about “the government” and not a word about threatening, attacking, or harming American citizens health, wealth, or safety … only the government.

      Or is the operative word here “conspiracy”, engaging in a conspiracy?

      Seems to me our Clown-in-Chief, as a Muslim, with all his “Fundamental Transformation” fits the bill of “committing treason against the US” can be clearly brought up on charges. Letting in many Syrian refugees, among others, beyond those he said he would and then secretly moving them to locations around the US as “cells” is planting the enemy in our midst. And no one calls him on it because he is … black. But they can blame the NRA!

  4. ZMan, what you don’t say when you state that the open borders crowd fails to address the issue of citizens supposedly having the right and duty to decide who gets to become a citizen via a quote from the Constitution is that they just don’t give a flying fu*K!

    As we have seen from Obozo, his Czars and the liberals, they don’t care anything about the Constitution or the Oaths they have taken. Just words. Just old pieces of paper produced by old white men.

    I guess I need to apologize for my language but one of the things that I have come to in the last couple of years is losing my sense of civility because I find that our leaders and the so-called elites display none whatsoever. They piss all over us and tell us it’s raining.

    I now see it as a weakness to play it safe and to play nice, to be a good American. I think we need to be more like Trump. We need to be in our enemies faces. We need to call them out. We need to call them liars just as he did with Hillary. We need to take the gloves off and get down and dirty because they only play by their rules and care none for our civility.

    I was raised to respect my elders, authority, to say “Yes Sir, Yes Ma’am” and to be a gentleman to all. But our society has become so crass that I find it no virtue to hold the high ground when all around me lie, cheat, steal, kill and otherwise destroy our way of life. Sure those on Wall street or in DC dress in fancy suits and eat at five star establishments but in their hearts, they are some of the worst beasts, much worse that the dirt people they sneer at. At least dirt people have dignity and pride.

    I do not respect them. You need to earn my respect. Just as I was taught that I must earn yours. Well, when our troops are being sent to fight with stupid ROE, rules that only stupid people consider “fair”, then I want to scream.

    Maybe we should discuss this, or maybe I should say you should make it a topic to discuss the issue of civility in times like these. Is it a good thing to retain the things we were taught? Or when faced with existential threats, do you still make time for having tea and the Geneva Convention?

  5. Excellent post. I have considered this also but not with the same clarity. Thanks

  6. I wonder how these “open border” supporters would react if I showed up at their house, walked into the kitchen, helped myself to a beer, sat down and watched sports on their couch. According to their logic, I would be welcome over anytime.

    Where did you say they live? Lufthansa has some extra cheap flights this weekend.

    • silly tablet.
      Well Karl,
      Your assessment of the logic is correct. If you were to “drop in” at my house – unannounced & a stranger – it would probably be ok, provided that you were charming, appeared benign, and were up front about why you popped in. Failing that, in my state,& township, shortly after your invasion of my home ( my castle), I would be mulling over the best place for your mortal remains. Authorities would not be notified, after you are Glocked.
      So, if you want to try your theory, go for it, but wear lederhosen and a nice hat with a feather.I’m a sucker for lederhosen. We have some nice local beers, too.

      • @ Crispin – I’ll bring the beer and be sure to knock when I arrive. 🙂 The idea of being “Glocked” does not sound so inviting.

    • I know someone who would welcome you and your whole family. Her name is Nancy Pelosi from California. Just be sure to tell her security, with all their guns, that you were invited by her though you do not have an appointment.

  7. Hey Zman, did you hear the latest about Austria? Their last election was where the Green Party won a narrow win over the Far-Right Party was annuled, massive voting fraud did happened after all, it was not a “Conspiracy theory”.

    • Scanning Austrian websites, I’m a little surprised it is not a bigger story. This is not a small thing and it is the sort of thing that starts revolts and riots. It’s one thing to fix an election. It’s another to do it so poorly that even the court says it has to be redone.

      • Yeah, I think the BREXIT vote was also rigged in favor of Remain but it didn’t worked because so many Englishman voted to Leave, postal voting in immigrant areas is also a thing in the UK.

  8. The crux of the war on the dirt peoples consent, as in culture is upstream of politic’s, where the politics of the day is a lever being used to place those politics upstream of culture in order to avoid and nullify the “contract” of consent of the governed. A cunning bullshit move if I have anything to say about it only a marxist cabal of corruptocrats could think will give them unlimited powers. It’s composition is cultural marxism writ large.

    It is indicative of the illegitimacy of the actors of the state and the grift they are running here is this guy with the biggest set of balls imaginable named Trump who is disrupting this statist kabuki theater. I always have had a sneaking suspicion Trump doesn’t care if he becomes president or not, I think he is a true dirt person, and he is fighting for consent of the dirt people. This is a guy on a mission. I think he is smart enough and with the resources in wealth and acumen of understanding human nature, all he has to do is point out the truth behind the charade and he destabilizes the entire con of the oligarchy. Trump in effect is creating a massive dirt peoples plural consent in the form of withdrawal of consent of the governed. Trump is not what is important, it is the rise of the movement of The Great Fuck You of the dirt people, and when the ‘fuck you’ party that is going for Trump finally figures out that they’ve been duped all along because there never was any voting their way out of this morass of tyranny to begin with, the dirt peoples consent party will change into the ‘I’m gonna get you sucka’ party, and it’s on like Donkey Kong. There is much in the wind on that score, I think the cultural confluence of resistance to tyranny is creating an ocean sized sea of discontent, and that discontent is coalescing into a plurality of people, who are on the threshold of revolting in such quantity and quality nothing will stand in it’s way.

  9. The move towards the custodial state is made even more interesting by the fact that the open-border-new-arriavls are generally deemed to be not guilty of any possible hate crimes (as they have only just arrived and therefore are removed from any ‘normal’ constraints of behaviour and speech) but those who are already here, having had their borders taken away by fiat, are as citizens apparently far more likely to be guilty of hate crimes. Thus it is the established citizenry who are liable to feel the wrath of the law and not the ones who have poured in recently.

    In other words, the existing state will only whip its own people who initially voted for and facilitated the current state.

    • You might think that the recent arrivals would be put on notice that “they” are the ones on “probation” and they had better behave themselves if they want to remain in country. But as usual, bureaucrats are thinking with their asses and do everything backwards and upside-down. Incredibly stupid.

  10. You have articulated the strong attraction to Donald Trump by we, the Dirt People. Many may just feel it in their gut, others may have thought it through, but the thing we see coming is the creation of the custodial state via open borders and the destruction of the citizen-to-citizen compact. It’s not abortion or school vouchers or any other so-called issue. It’s the destruction of a way of life that had gone unquestioned until the 1960s that has aroused the beast that the statists so despise. If Hilary wins we will have lost our country forever.

    • She (Hillary) is the absolute worst candidate I have seen in my lifetime. I think we can keep her from the WH but what do we do about all her sychophants? So many, so little time!

  11. I was in Ireland a few weeks ago on holiday and learned there is a current interest by some Americans with Irish heritage to return to Ireland. Evidently ‘citizenship through descent’ is possible in Ireland by proving one has Irish grandparents. Some Americans think things are so bad in the US right now, they are trying to return to their ancestral lands.

    • Karl, I just read the link. Did I read that right – that meaning of the law is that Irish ancestry qualifies one for Irish citizenship outside the borders to Ireland? Is this for real?

      If so, the border of Ireland didn’t disappear, it just moved outward in a demographic spray pattern, apparently ignoring the sovereignty of where ever it goes. Did I misunderstand the link?

      • Just proof read my little comment, after I posted it. Am I nuts, or is making corrections and then sending it again normal for most people….

        Karl, I just read the link. Did I read that right – Irish ancestry qualifies one for Irish citizenship outside the borders of Ireland? Is this for real?
        If so, the border of Ireland didn’t disappear, it just moved outward in a demographic spray pattern, apparently ignoring the sovereignty of where ever it goes. Did I misunderstand the link?

        • Citizenship through descent – “If you were born outside Ireland to an Irish citizen who was himself or herself born in Ireland, then you are an Irish citizen.” – So to answer your question, from the information in the immigration brochure, they are pretty much willing to take anyone that is remotely linked to Ireland. And I suspect if you like potatoes, know who “Jesus, Joseph and Mary are” and hate the English…you’re in.

  12. Seems to me that Ireton was not rejecting the concept of citizenship outright, but arguing that property in the land (“a fixed and permanent interest”) is a necessary precondition of that right.

    • I don’t know how you can think that. His response was to Rainsborough who said,

      Sir, I think it’s clear, that every man that is to live under a government ought first by his own consent to put himself under that government; and I do think that the poorest man in England is not bound in a strict sense to that government that he hath not had a voice to put himself under.

      • If Ireton’s description of interest were applied not to citizenship but to the franchise we would still have a functioning republic.

        • That’s certainly true and I think there is a good argument for defining citizen up. The problem there is how to go about defining it up. Property ownership made sense when property was the basis for wealth, but that’s not the case today.

          • Yes, there is that. To achieve something similar now would be to define it in a negative sense. You do not gain the vote through what you have acquired, but lose it by the method you have acquired it. All programs that benefit the individual with public money which are not mandated upon the individual (such as SS). Welfare in all forms, government employees, public school teachers. County, state, federal. Disinterest was once a word much in use and held as a great virtue in governance.

            None of this is possible, of course, the point being that we are at the state of decay we should be in a democracy. It’s a republic, if you can keep it.

          • Hear hear! And hence, all those on “welfare in all it’s forms” should be disqualified from voting. That is why there is so much political effort focused on buying votes, i.e. immigration. All we need to do is properly define “welfare” to be clear who fits that label.

  13. Z, this is one of your best. I read your blog every day, comments too, and I truly appreciate your insight.

    We must protect this nation. By all means necessary. I’m in.

    • Amen, Mike. I had not thought about citizenship in quite this way before. And I’m convinced that this election is exactly about this subject. Thanks, Zman.

    • 5 minutes or word counter? Never mind. Let him speak his mind.

      At least he is not trolling us with “You can earn $10,000 per week! with working at home” type crap.

      If anything, Doug represents the frustration many have of the current situation. If you don’t like it, just skip it.

      • Thanks LP. I appreciate you for saying that, it’s funny too.
        I’m trolling, but I’m trolling for something fundamental, believe in something so strongly I’m not afraid of speaking my mind and taking my lumps and learning, because everyone has a perspective and a viewpoint worth listening to.

  14. What you’re saying, in a nutshell, is “Freedom of Association” is paramount.

    The State is working overtime to take that away from us (bussing, Sec 8 housing, AA hiring laws, etc.).

    A backlash is finally, finally coming.

    From Western Rifle Shooters today:
    ““…You guys (the left) really want to stop pushing quite so hard. The political pendulum has never, in the history of humanity, stayed on one side of a swing. The back lash from over reach has always been proportionate to how far off center it went before coming back. (Hint, that’s what started the whole prohibition thing, and it’s also what started the 60s, was backlashes) Well right now we’re staring at a whole hell of a lot of the country (about 80-90% of the land mass, as well as about 50% of the population) that is FED UP. You really don’t want those guys to decide that the only way to fix it is to burn it down and start over… REALLY! Most of these folks are vets, and the children of vets, they’ve had guns in their hands since middle school or before, or they’re still serving either in the regulars, the reserves, or the NG. If it goes to armed insurrection, even if the left wins, (highly damn unlikely) it will be a mess worse than reconstruction, worse than the Balkans. For the love of the country that I’ve served for over three decades, start seeking peace now.”

    And this link…

      • I’m gonna say this because I’m a dirt person, and I have to say it or what being a dirt person is about is something I have forsaken if I don’t. I want to argue with everyone of you guys on here. Come on, don’t chicken out, lets go at it and have a serious as a heart attack fight about our dirt rights as free men. No holds barred, lets air our dirty draws. Come on, I dare everyone here to come at me on what I got to say.

        Lot of you all are missing something crucial. Fundamental. Sincerely, I’m not trying to bust balls, I want my liberty. No excuses. And quite frankly, unless we all get down to the nitty gritty of what Z implies in this post and the last, we are all like a thousand ants on a head of a pin, all trying to be heard at once, floating down the Potomac river past that cesspool of hubris called the capitol, on a soap box.

        Voting is what got us into this fucking disaster. Voting is not going to get us out of this disaster. Only our fortitude and our powerful force of consent wielded a a foil against the tyrants urupers, in a nut shell, the words I Won’t! and MYOB!, (Mind Your Own Business”) is going to save that so called contract. Voting is what enabled the sonsofabitches in the first place to to take over. remember, he who counts the votes wins. Majority rule through the voting process, or scam, is useless, if it worked the state would have made it illegal already. Voting is a mob rule Sundae with a cherry on top. It solves nothing, because it doesn’t address the real important thing. Culture on top, the human terrain on top, culture upstream of politics. Because voting, is playing along with the kabuki theater of politics, it is playing by the enemies rules. And you never commit to battle or war on your enemies terms. And since when does politics take precedence over my or your, or any of our primal dirt rights? And what is there to argue about on that score, it is like thinking voting our way out of this is an option?

        Listen you guys, bad things are breathing down our throats, time is tight to save what remains of the reason and civility of the west. I’m not, seriously not, saying all is lost, in fact I believe in the good in dirt people with a vengeance, but if we all don’t find a way to help each other out and come together as a plurality of people who refuse to comply in no uncertain terms, the alternatives will be a shitload more painful. It is really going to hurt, and quite frankly many of us may not make it.

        The bastards are reeling right now, the fiat con is teetering on the precipice of economic Armageddon.
        The so called “elites”, being neither, are in serious quandary about what they can get away with repressing popular revolt.

        Instead of jaw boning about minutiae of what historical event or people lead to today, why don’t we all make our own history. The kind that we pass on to our decedents. Like what our founders did for us? Lot to be said for it, we wouldn’t be here like this today if not for them.

        • Doug – In case you missed the whole Brexit thing, they voted and got out of the EU. So I’d say that voting actually works when enough people actually do it. However, according to exit polls in the UK, less than 37% of people under 24-years old bothered to vote, while nearly 80% of people over 55 voted. Demographically, I the over 50-something are the majority of the population here and in the US.

          If you want to “rally the troops” I’d encourage you to head to your local University and get them to register. In todays world, the use of arms has little, if any effect against the status quo especially by the dirt people. The US just lowered the British credit rating from AAA to AA (1) and did more damage to the British economy than if they had dropped troops into Buckingham palace and held the Queen hostage.

          By the way, the US did this to the Brits back in 1956-57 under Eisenhower, which effectively ended the UK empire (2).


          • Karl, you ain’t seeing the forest for the trees. Resistance is never futile against tyranny in all it’s forms, the truth is resistance is the point. Your whistling past history. The American Patriots of the American revolution where armed revolutionary’s who won. So too the Brits at Runnymeade in 1215, though to their great British character and credit they used the threat of using them, and having been armed with the long bow, it was a great equalizer, kind of like the AR15, the Queens of battles of both ages, and King John was a shrewd enough potentate to know when to back down: not like the psychopaths running things today, and that is a serious reality that has to be taken into account regarding the equation of resistance to tyranny, (and voting too just to split hairs with you).

            So Karl, in argument to your mention of armed resistance, if it is not a viable option that doesn’t work, why our respective political elites so hell bent on disarming us dirt people? Why are you as a sovereign man restricted to such a degree to own property in the form of a firearm? Owning property is a seriously important component of liberty. And a gun that is yours is property, just like a car or your home. Who gets to decide these things? Who has the power to decide these things. You? An unaccountable unapproachable Eurocrat?

            I think you missed my premiss on voting. I didn’t say voting doesn’t work, I said there is no voting our way out of this, not by the ballot box. The process of voting is a decrepit malign tumor of gerrymander and rigging. It has been corrupted and abused by those interested to protect it in the first place so they can win. f they couldn’t do that, they would have made it illegal. You have to fix that first if voting is the only option. But I’ll grant you your point on the grounds they can’t corrupt every instance of defiance by the dirt people.

            And who knows how deep the rabbit hole goes? Maybe Brexit was a fix, the whole thing a false flag, and the bastards let the Brits vote secession. Maybe it was a way to actually create even more power for the banksters, maybe they had to let off some steam before the tempest in a tea pot of economics and politics exploded. These transnationalist’s are cunning fuckers. Marxists are nothing if they don’t understand and work from the long view of social engineering

            And come on, lets be frank here, I read your comments every day, your not that dumb are you you believe voting is going to rid us of the sonofabitches running things? Their hubris and almost unfathomable greed and corruption?

            My premiss is it requires culture, not politics, people, not “laws” to bring the kind of change necessary to have rightful liberty, not statism light, feudalism, or some form of be nine State that rules over peoples primal rights as men. Voting is not liberty, at best if untainted it is an action of liberty. Action is always very important. As the German military infantry geniuses so sublimely put it. “It’s the act”. The human terrain in any conflict is always on top, and the more fundamental to the rights and sovereignty of dirt people that conflict is, the more important that human terrain becomes. Liberty is upstream of all politics, it must come first, everything follows, or all you have is one form of tyranny or another.

          • @ Doug – I appreciate the compliment. But despite the historic rhetoric and classic examples of resistance to tyranny, I also realize it takes very little for your IRS or any number of agencies in the US or Europe, to obliterate your bank account and find you guilty of any one of their countless laws and haul you off in chains. Todays example of the US lower the UK credit rating – all in the stroke of a pen.

            The days of armed citizen revolts are over – unless you like the idea of moving to South America or the Middle East or any number of non-democratic republics.

            As I asked LetsPlay in a previous blog, the of idea armed, unorganized civilians against Reaper Drones and 3rd generation FLIR technology, while romantic, is pointless. And I doubt anyone is willing to follow the example of resistance to the extreme as demonstrated at Masada, rather than bend a knee.

            No, the vote is all we have and it is guaranteed in our respective constitutions. It is how civilized nations work. Unfortunately, as some have criticized, the majority of people are either ‘sheeple’ or are barely smarter than a French fry. Thus the liberal advantage we see today. The people we are up against won’t stop pushing their agenda, and when you live in an age where the attention span is about 3-minutes, the majority of people would rather just “go with it” just to shut them up.

            Unfortunately, “going with it” ultimately gets you hauled off in the night.

          • There is a saying about our gun’s Karl: “Because Fuck You That’s Why”
            Your stuck on armed resistance, does the idea horrify you? Your mistaking one thing for another, it is not rhetoric, it is history and truth I’m talking about. I think your concept of resistance is futile is a product of your life lived in a socialist country where brain washing and disarmament of civilians is standard operating procedure of those who have a vested interest in keeping resistance to them in the first place a dead cat. IOf armed resistance is as futile as you argue, how come your government restricts civilian use of guns? Wouldn’t there be nothing for those in power to fear if your argument is valid? Or maybe you are a totalitarian at heart? I’m trying to understand where you are coming from. Your a contradiction in terms. With due respect, It is certainly your business to see resistance in the light even to resist in the first place as a lost cause. Not by business to stop you, or not. That is liberty right there, liberty for me, liberty for thee.

            You keep mentioning being assaulted by the powers that be if we resist that we loose everything. My friend, at that point, you have everything to gain and nothing to loose but liberty itself. If you choose to be a slave of the state, that is fine and dandy then. See something here Karl? It comes down to choice. You choose to be free, or you choose not to be. Nobody can make you choose. You are free or you are not. Arms are secondary. It is why it is called the 2nd Amendment. If you are free, it doesn’t matter what the state does, or how much force or violence it threatens or uses. You find ways to resist regardless. And that is the thing, why resistance is never futile. You miss the whole concept of defiance. Let me tell you, when your government becomes that violent totalitarian leviathan, there is nothing to fear but a repressive violent leviathan. When you are truly a Freeman, there is nothing to fear but not resisting it. Get it Karl?

            Do you understand, long as you believe resistance is futile, you are an enabler of those who see resistance to tyranny as an existential threat? You do exactly what they require to control defiance to them. Integral to that is armed resistance is not near as important as you are implying or I gather you believe. It is the act of resisting in all forms that are what resistance is about, the armed component if employed is a last resorts if reason and principles of being a Freeman is a guide. Understand this: if armed resistance was a first prerogative in my country of patriots and rights of men, it would have already taken place. Liberty isn’t an agenda. That is why the Revolutionary war was won, because it wasn’t a revolution for power, or profit, or political goals.

            It is an indication of the tolerance and 1st principles, the faith in republican form of government, those in control who have usurped our representative and what they are doing not withstanding, of the good nature and desire for peaceful lawful means of redress so many millions of my fellow American’s stay their hand against our tyrants. Many see that as serfdom or cowardliness or a people who are submissive. But to endure and hold ones hand, is a sign of virtue and character. By no means is it bending a knee or slavery, quite the contrary. That says everything about our character, who we are, because Brother, millions of us dirt people are armed to the fucking teeth and pissed off. Those running things, their agenda’s, politics, corruption what have you, they are not representative of a vast plurality like me. You are aware of what happened in your country when us dirt people where pissed off at tyrants right?

            The American Revolution was waged by armed revolutionary’s who won. That was only possible because of us dirt people, then, and in the future. No matter what politicians, governments, history or revised history, or rhetoric, says.

            American’s? Ya we are American’s, it is what we are, for good or bad, better or worse, but who we are changed the world like nothing else, why they are trying to destroy what makes us American’s. Here is the funny thing, we have guns Karl, not because we are going to use them, but because we are not. Because “come and get em”. Because fuck you that’s why.

            I wish you could visit where I live Karl, stay at my house, meet my friends and niebhors, see for yourself what we are made of, what matters most. You would see people completely different than you think we are.

Comments are closed.