It is curious, claiming the Constitution is a flawed document when you fail to abide by any of it. As you say, the Constitution did not fail us, we as Americans have failed it. It is good indeed to know there are still those who will fight for it.
I suppose I should also address the subtopic: the Constitution and cynicism.
I think it is a divinely inspired document that is better than anything that has come before it or after it. But as the founders said: it is only suited for a moral people. It's only suited for an educated populace, including and especially educated in civics. It's only suited for people who follow the rules and let words mean what they mean and not what you twist them to mean. In short, the Constitution didn't fail, the people did.
We are in a lawless post-Constitution Oligarchy. It's best to get your mind right about that, pain and heartbreak and probably jail time await you otherwise. Just ask "Enrique" Tarrio. He was an FBI informant and he's still going to jail. Assuming they don't Oswald him, like Lee Harvey.
Power matters, and only power. The stakes are who can take power and use the State to advance their agenda. So far, it has been the Left, Democrats and rich f**knuts who actually run things without bothering about elections. If the Right is going to reverse the trend...well...they aren't. The Right writes books. The Left occupies cities and gets their foot soldiers bail and charges dropped. And then give book deals to the real sellouts that pay 100 times what the books make in sales. Or 10,000 times.
Not a cheerful view, I suppose. But everything dies, and there's no going back to the way things were. The way forward will be dominated by one side or the other. And the Right is still trying to pick out their running shoes, while the Left bolted before the starting gun even went off.
But thank you for the post man. I appreciate hearing from you.
There's some nuance that I would like to inject into that. You can use a framework where you only analyze things in terms of power, but if you do, the spiritual domain and spiritual power must be accounted for, which is difficult. I argue that there is still spiritual power to be harnessed in the constitution, and that when it is violated so egregiously by those who swore an oath to defend it, they lose ground in this domain. One of the officers referenced in this book wrote an outstanding primer on the subject framing it in terms of joint doctrine. I'm very much looking forward to sharing when he's ready to deliver it.
I was mostly focused on the world here and now, not so much with spiritual concerns. Naturally that also has an impact and an outsized impact. But there have been great Christian nations that have risen and fallen before us. I no longer think we are special as in an exception to fate.
The spiritual domain definitely impacts the here and now. As far as worldly outcomes I don't think there are ever any guarantees. You do what is right and accept the consequences (if you're spiritually aligned/justified in the Pauline sense). Those who believe in an after life have more to be consoled about. I acknowledge failure is a possibility, but I'd rather fail doing the right thing than succeed by compromising conscience. Kruptos had a good article about this, and I've written about the relationship between why and how and their inextricable linkage. You want me to try to dig up links to that Kruptos article?
I fundamentally disagree with 'turn the other cheek' doctrine and tend to want my enemies dead. It's frowned upon, I'm sure, in most Christian circles. Also I like boobs a lot :)
Thank you for the link, I'll read it as soon as I can.
Having been negative, here’s some founded and experienced hope; this system dies with Biden, there are no feasible successors at any level. Not in the apparently all important peaceful, orderly and above all legal sense. Harris cannot hold, nor Pelosi, nor any of them nor this apparatus. Everyone else that hasn’t walked away will be running, a mere gaggle of grandmothers has them groveling on the floor of the house.
In terms of this ends with Biden, they’re victims of their own success. They excel in core goals.
The system excels at 2 things;
1. Poppy cropping at every level, eliminating or ruining, or driving out talent. There are no challengers or feasible successors.
2. Corruption and rice bowls, to the point of consuming the seed corn. Again, success to ruin.
As to what follows Bello Fortuna!
Do cheer up, the world is at your feet! Boots. Swordpoint.
Do embrace the primal, you are holding onto a corpse you cannot admit is dead, breathing into and pumping the chest of rigor mortus. She’s gone.
Let’s go get another, my God the French have had 5. We are widowers, so lets *very carefully* remarry, we’ll do it for the children.
Haha, I'm not moping, I'm being realistically optimistic! Believe it or not, I am a realist, but that is the great thing about this message. We're engaging in the spiritual domain and we've won a critical battle. At the end of the day I'm still collecting a paycheck from the USG and I didn't have to compromise my principles. Also, I'm working to enhance the holistic health and fitness of Soldiers. You know what I believe? That holistically healthy and fit soldiers are less likely to follow illegal and unconstitutional orders. It worked for me, after all. Its no more dead than natural law is dead. It is a common language to describe natural law, and btw point out that every government employee took an oath to obey it. There are consequences to violating oaths. They can be described in materialist terms but to do so is excessively cumbersome. This is ultimately a spiritual battle and the constitution is merely a cultural technology, and no, it isn't completely dead because the majority of Americans understand the 1st and 2nd amendments and are supportive of them, and this plays a role in electoral politics, and yes, engaging in that system is beneficial if only because it requires the enemy to expend resources.
Now work the problem without emotion or moral delusions as a doctor evaluates cancer, or perchance as a soldier plans to kill a large number of strangers who have done him no wrong.
By moral delusion I really mean your apparent “should” is hopelessly clouding analysis of facts.
Fact; the Republic has fallen.
Fact; the Constitutional elected government had long since lost power over the bureaucracy , it was gone by the late 1940s.
Fact; we didn’t uphold our oath, because we had no orders to defend the Republic. In fact the opposite was done to defend the government and keep the Empire we call The Rules based International Order.
Fact; elections are now firmly in the hand of the government.
Questions;
Are we bound to something that was dissolved because it wasn’t defended?
Survive. Raise families. Commune with the like-minded. Learn. Teach. Don't give up. Hopefully when the time comes for decisive action you'll be ready. It might not be soon, though. Possibly not in our lifetime.
But Plan Family is a proven failure. It already failed.
It’s no plan for a society or even local community, neither of which can hold off even the smallest nation state never mind the US Government.
It is failing now, what kind of Father now would send his children to school? Most of them.
Breed children to be the playthings of fiends? No.
The Homeschoolers will be dealt with as the mop up and consolidation of these conquered American states continue. The children will simply be seized, and you’ll find that what was empty all along was this fantasy of home life dangled... rather constantly word for word... almost like a script.
Hmm 🤔 one I see often...🤔
If not a script then the plan of Asians, who have been slaves for 2000 years, for they too are scraping feminine peasants. Not even they however agree to have their children transitioned by fiends. They will often if hungry and they often are assent to prostitution, but Dr. Mengele’s labs are too far, but not for Americans however.
Empty indeed and more than rhetoric.
And have children and survive is A WOMANS PLAN, a WOMAN’S option, not a Man’s. MEN defend their families, which is why they have to band together in the common defense. Men are expendable and expected to fight, and die. Actual men would be, but American Fatherhood precludes protection it seems...
Engage in the spiritual domain. Lots to be said, lots to be done. I'm doing and saying what I can to be as effective as I can towards achieving desired ends in accordance with my principles. The constitution plays a role in that.
The Constitution is a meaningless peace of paper unless enforced by violence, which is how it was established and maintained. It was de-established by guile , legal maneuvering and above all bribery of the people and those sworn to defend the Constitution.
> except for the military because they’re not worth buying, also because such direct offers of money in exchange for Oath breaking were dangerous, were.... the present generation of SECDEF, GOFOS and no small amount of Field Grades (present company excepted) show it is no longer dangerous.
If it was proffered to those reading would it be dangerous?
The legal maneuvering can go both ways and yes, make it dangerous to break oaths. Hard to imagine, but just think of people being prosecuted and tried in front of DC juries for exercising their rights. Now think about how this can be reversed. It can be and should be if we have any hope of achieving a sort of lawfare cease fire. As for enforcement by violence, I don't know. I'm not sure there needs to be a monopoly on force, and indeed with the right to trial by impartial jury there is a sort of Constitutional framework that is consistent with that. I don't think the government can defend rights very well if at all. It will always be used by the worst of us towards nefarious ends. That is why the federal system and separation of powers is so important. Those need to be aggressively restored so that state bodies can focus on being adversarial towards each other instead of the populace.
As it happens when I saw DC Green Zone, I saw DCs choice.
Now the real choice those on active service will face all at once is DO for DC or DO something else. Doing nothing, or getting a lawyer (🤣 stop) ain’t an option. Ask the Ukrainians getting yanked off the street.
and we inactive reservists with a bit more time- same choice
Given the interest here in constitutionality, I'd be interested in what people think of the "1930s Redux" narrative that is constantly being put out, and how that narrative erodes constitutional government. In the wake of the Durham Report, take a look at this article just out in The TransAtlantic for context, you might get something from it…
I don't entirely know what you mean, but he's not a litigant - he hasn't been a party to any lawsuits. Also, don't know what you mean by saying not a soldier, he's a SWO by trade and as legit a warrior as any SWO. I'd say if he's not a legit warrior then there aren't any SWOs who are.
Rob does some deep research and provided a very satisfying argument/narrative arc, I don't want to give any spoilers but the gist is that he GREATLY expanded the meaning of Jacobson in Buck v. Bell.
The first one mentions Oliver Wendell Holmes explicitly, but he does not attribute any of the decisions he brings to Holmes (possibly if you know your way around the Constitutional Law, or simply look them up you'd find those decided by OWH.)
BTW Grant, he brings an interesting point that I had not known before reading that series of essays: one of the walls was "A government of mixed type", which is not the same as the "separation of powers". Look it up there (https://treeofwoe.substack.com/p/the-seven-walls-of-fortress-america-b4a), but on one foot: the President stands for the monarchical form of the government, the Senate - for aristocratic, and the House for the democratic element.
I read the 1st in that series and have planned on going back and reading through. I expect it to be excellent, always a big fan of most everything Macris writes. Thanks for the reminder and the connection to this subject matter!
It is curious, claiming the Constitution is a flawed document when you fail to abide by any of it. As you say, the Constitution did not fail us, we as Americans have failed it. It is good indeed to know there are still those who will fight for it.
I suppose I should also address the subtopic: the Constitution and cynicism.
I think it is a divinely inspired document that is better than anything that has come before it or after it. But as the founders said: it is only suited for a moral people. It's only suited for an educated populace, including and especially educated in civics. It's only suited for people who follow the rules and let words mean what they mean and not what you twist them to mean. In short, the Constitution didn't fail, the people did.
We are in a lawless post-Constitution Oligarchy. It's best to get your mind right about that, pain and heartbreak and probably jail time await you otherwise. Just ask "Enrique" Tarrio. He was an FBI informant and he's still going to jail. Assuming they don't Oswald him, like Lee Harvey.
Power matters, and only power. The stakes are who can take power and use the State to advance their agenda. So far, it has been the Left, Democrats and rich f**knuts who actually run things without bothering about elections. If the Right is going to reverse the trend...well...they aren't. The Right writes books. The Left occupies cities and gets their foot soldiers bail and charges dropped. And then give book deals to the real sellouts that pay 100 times what the books make in sales. Or 10,000 times.
Not a cheerful view, I suppose. But everything dies, and there's no going back to the way things were. The way forward will be dominated by one side or the other. And the Right is still trying to pick out their running shoes, while the Left bolted before the starting gun even went off.
But thank you for the post man. I appreciate hearing from you.
There's some nuance that I would like to inject into that. You can use a framework where you only analyze things in terms of power, but if you do, the spiritual domain and spiritual power must be accounted for, which is difficult. I argue that there is still spiritual power to be harnessed in the constitution, and that when it is violated so egregiously by those who swore an oath to defend it, they lose ground in this domain. One of the officers referenced in this book wrote an outstanding primer on the subject framing it in terms of joint doctrine. I'm very much looking forward to sharing when he's ready to deliver it.
I was mostly focused on the world here and now, not so much with spiritual concerns. Naturally that also has an impact and an outsized impact. But there have been great Christian nations that have risen and fallen before us. I no longer think we are special as in an exception to fate.
The spiritual domain definitely impacts the here and now. As far as worldly outcomes I don't think there are ever any guarantees. You do what is right and accept the consequences (if you're spiritually aligned/justified in the Pauline sense). Those who believe in an after life have more to be consoled about. I acknowledge failure is a possibility, but I'd rather fail doing the right thing than succeed by compromising conscience. Kruptos had a good article about this, and I've written about the relationship between why and how and their inextricable linkage. You want me to try to dig up links to that Kruptos article?
Yes please. I can't promise I'll agree with it....I'm not a very nice person in some ways....but I'd like to read it.
phew! Kruptos nuked his old stack, long story but thankfully some hero archived it before the deed was done, perhaps it was the man himself... in any case: https://web.archive.org/web/20230408070101/https://apokekrummenain.substack.com/p/breaking-the-habits-of-western-thinking Also why do you say you're not a very nice person, because you're disagreeable? That can be a strength...
I fundamentally disagree with 'turn the other cheek' doctrine and tend to want my enemies dead. It's frowned upon, I'm sure, in most Christian circles. Also I like boobs a lot :)
Thank you for the link, I'll read it as soon as I can.
Having been negative, here’s some founded and experienced hope; this system dies with Biden, there are no feasible successors at any level. Not in the apparently all important peaceful, orderly and above all legal sense. Harris cannot hold, nor Pelosi, nor any of them nor this apparatus. Everyone else that hasn’t walked away will be running, a mere gaggle of grandmothers has them groveling on the floor of the house.
In terms of this ends with Biden, they’re victims of their own success. They excel in core goals.
The system excels at 2 things;
1. Poppy cropping at every level, eliminating or ruining, or driving out talent. There are no challengers or feasible successors.
2. Corruption and rice bowls, to the point of consuming the seed corn. Again, success to ruin.
As to what follows Bello Fortuna!
Do cheer up, the world is at your feet! Boots. Swordpoint.
Do embrace the primal, you are holding onto a corpse you cannot admit is dead, breathing into and pumping the chest of rigor mortus. She’s gone.
Let’s go get another, my God the French have had 5. We are widowers, so lets *very carefully* remarry, we’ll do it for the children.
🇺🇸 are children, but they deserve better.
Stop moping SIR, think of the children.
Haha, I'm not moping, I'm being realistically optimistic! Believe it or not, I am a realist, but that is the great thing about this message. We're engaging in the spiritual domain and we've won a critical battle. At the end of the day I'm still collecting a paycheck from the USG and I didn't have to compromise my principles. Also, I'm working to enhance the holistic health and fitness of Soldiers. You know what I believe? That holistically healthy and fit soldiers are less likely to follow illegal and unconstitutional orders. It worked for me, after all. Its no more dead than natural law is dead. It is a common language to describe natural law, and btw point out that every government employee took an oath to obey it. There are consequences to violating oaths. They can be described in materialist terms but to do so is excessively cumbersome. This is ultimately a spiritual battle and the constitution is merely a cultural technology, and no, it isn't completely dead because the majority of Americans understand the 1st and 2nd amendments and are supportive of them, and this plays a role in electoral politics, and yes, engaging in that system is beneficial if only because it requires the enemy to expend resources.
No.
War will clear this up.
I’d say you have to decide, you don’t. Really.
Because others have, and others will.
Sorry about this, but the truth is less awful perhaps if warned of...
“The people have failed.”
Yes.
Now work the problem without emotion or moral delusions as a doctor evaluates cancer, or perchance as a soldier plans to kill a large number of strangers who have done him no wrong.
By moral delusion I really mean your apparent “should” is hopelessly clouding analysis of facts.
Fact; the Republic has fallen.
Fact; the Constitutional elected government had long since lost power over the bureaucracy , it was gone by the late 1940s.
Fact; we didn’t uphold our oath, because we had no orders to defend the Republic. In fact the opposite was done to defend the government and keep the Empire we call The Rules based International Order.
Fact; elections are now firmly in the hand of the government.
Questions;
Are we bound to something that was dissolved because it wasn’t defended?
I say no.
Above all; What is to be done?
Done, not said.
>What is to be done?
Survive. Raise families. Commune with the like-minded. Learn. Teach. Don't give up. Hopefully when the time comes for decisive action you'll be ready. It might not be soon, though. Possibly not in our lifetime.
Fail. Sorry. FAIL. Raise slaves and hope for the best? No.
empty rhetoric
Until it isn’t.
Perhaps it won’t be.
But Plan Family is a proven failure. It already failed.
It’s no plan for a society or even local community, neither of which can hold off even the smallest nation state never mind the US Government.
It is failing now, what kind of Father now would send his children to school? Most of them.
Breed children to be the playthings of fiends? No.
The Homeschoolers will be dealt with as the mop up and consolidation of these conquered American states continue. The children will simply be seized, and you’ll find that what was empty all along was this fantasy of home life dangled... rather constantly word for word... almost like a script.
Hmm 🤔 one I see often...🤔
If not a script then the plan of Asians, who have been slaves for 2000 years, for they too are scraping feminine peasants. Not even they however agree to have their children transitioned by fiends. They will often if hungry and they often are assent to prostitution, but Dr. Mengele’s labs are too far, but not for Americans however.
Empty indeed and more than rhetoric.
And have children and survive is A WOMANS PLAN, a WOMAN’S option, not a Man’s. MEN defend their families, which is why they have to band together in the common defense. Men are expendable and expected to fight, and die. Actual men would be, but American Fatherhood precludes protection it seems...
More than rhetoric is empty in America.
Engage in the spiritual domain. Lots to be said, lots to be done. I'm doing and saying what I can to be as effective as I can towards achieving desired ends in accordance with my principles. The constitution plays a role in that.
The Constitution is a meaningless peace of paper unless enforced by violence, which is how it was established and maintained. It was de-established by guile , legal maneuvering and above all bribery of the people and those sworn to defend the Constitution.
> except for the military because they’re not worth buying, also because such direct offers of money in exchange for Oath breaking were dangerous, were.... the present generation of SECDEF, GOFOS and no small amount of Field Grades (present company excepted) show it is no longer dangerous.
If it was proffered to those reading would it be dangerous?
Would you be dangerous?
Better have an answer, at least within yourself.
Not yes or No, I know it’s No.
Dangerous? That is the question.
Only you can answer.
That moment comes.
The legal maneuvering can go both ways and yes, make it dangerous to break oaths. Hard to imagine, but just think of people being prosecuted and tried in front of DC juries for exercising their rights. Now think about how this can be reversed. It can be and should be if we have any hope of achieving a sort of lawfare cease fire. As for enforcement by violence, I don't know. I'm not sure there needs to be a monopoly on force, and indeed with the right to trial by impartial jury there is a sort of Constitutional framework that is consistent with that. I don't think the government can defend rights very well if at all. It will always be used by the worst of us towards nefarious ends. That is why the federal system and separation of powers is so important. Those need to be aggressively restored so that state bodies can focus on being adversarial towards each other instead of the populace.
You are speaking in legal terms............
.............
All can read yes-
The problem is I think you mean it
Well, not up to us.
As it happens when I saw DC Green Zone, I saw DCs choice.
Now the real choice those on active service will face all at once is DO for DC or DO something else. Doing nothing, or getting a lawyer (🤣 stop) ain’t an option. Ask the Ukrainians getting yanked off the street.
and we inactive reservists with a bit more time- same choice
>I have faith that endeavoring to uphold the rule of law under the U.S. Constitution is the worthiest of causes
Yarvin is one of the staunchest supporters of the Rule of Law. Not under the Constitution, though.
> in violation of sacred oaths
> It is just a document, after all
I can't read your mind, but it seems to me that you consider that document to be sacred, not "just a document". I know I subconsciously did.
The oaths are sacred, not the document. I really don't think the document is sacred, but when I take an oath that is as serious as it gets for me.
Thanks for the heads up about the book, I'll check it out.
I'm going to try and get this article to the young military men in my acquaintance.
Given the interest here in constitutionality, I'd be interested in what people think of the "1930s Redux" narrative that is constantly being put out, and how that narrative erodes constitutional government. In the wake of the Durham Report, take a look at this article just out in The TransAtlantic for context, you might get something from it…
https://thetransatlantic.substack.com/p/durham-report-trump-russia-nazis-history
This hero is not a soldier, but a litigant.
I don't entirely know what you mean, but he's not a litigant - he hasn't been a party to any lawsuits. Also, don't know what you mean by saying not a soldier, he's a SWO by trade and as legit a warrior as any SWO. I'd say if he's not a legit warrior then there aren't any SWOs who are.
Soldiers = ☠️
The only ☠️ on this are the vaxed
Rob does some deep research and provided a very satisfying argument/narrative arc, I don't want to give any spoilers but the gist is that he GREATLY expanded the meaning of Jacobson in Buck v. Bell.
Here is the last in the series of posts by Alex Marcis on how the Constitutional "walls" were breached: https://treeofwoe.substack.com/p/the-seven-walls-of-fortress-america-c9c . (It references all other posts in that series.)
The first one mentions Oliver Wendell Holmes explicitly, but he does not attribute any of the decisions he brings to Holmes (possibly if you know your way around the Constitutional Law, or simply look them up you'd find those decided by OWH.)
BTW Grant, he brings an interesting point that I had not known before reading that series of essays: one of the walls was "A government of mixed type", which is not the same as the "separation of powers". Look it up there (https://treeofwoe.substack.com/p/the-seven-walls-of-fortress-america-b4a), but on one foot: the President stands for the monarchical form of the government, the Senate - for aristocratic, and the House for the democratic element.
I read the 1st in that series and have planned on going back and reading through. I expect it to be excellent, always a big fan of most everything Macris writes. Thanks for the reminder and the connection to this subject matter!