Out the ashes of chaos, occasionally, something remarkable happens; humans reliving history define for themselves and alternate future hoping to remove themselves from the more common trajectory; the congregation of decay was only compatible with tyranny and incompatible with a Sovereign Individual and a Free and Independent States; the 13 Founding American Colonies.
There are many reasons lying behind the devolution of the American form of Representative Government there is, however, only one cause:
“In their quest to express individuality the American People have replaced duty with entitlement, enduring truth with temporal impulse and common sense with fantasy.”
Noted media personality and constitutional technician, Mark Levin, has recently released a truly remarkable effort, The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic, a literary achievement that should be on your must-read-list. As powerful as the “Article V” option is we must also be alert to the “cause” (above) and the implicit risk that accompanies these adopted traits. As compelling as this summary-cure might be the truth remains; a Constitutional Convention is wrought with Danger, SERIOUS Danger as without a compressed, disciplined and rigid composition a rogue element can just as easily unravel the existing structure. The relevance of the risk may also be precisely why and Article V Convention has never occurred. This approach requires the steady hand of conviction unaffected by temporal notions of impulse and fleeting customs; a deeper consideration is in order.
If you open up the Constitution to a summary modification then by what method or mechanism would you impose to prevent unwanted or undisclosed changes to an already Near-Perfect Document (save for a few of the later Amendments; the 16th, 17th & 27th being examples)? True, Article V is specific as to the process and enforces upon Congress the very same mandate of compliance as to the will of three-fourths of the States but then how does one account for the inactivity of these very States or their complicity? In an environment of decay where no order is maintained or sanctuary of conscience exists then, summarizing the concerns of both James Madison and George Mason;
In the incidence of such failure who then remains to oppose the Tyranny of Forces; who then shall brave to convenience upon and levy measures disabling their penchant for abuse?
If the American Public intends to remain a bystander then it is a certainty that whatever fix may come it will surely usher in the very facilities required to defeat it or widen the port of access for further abuses. In truth, again with very few exceptions, there is little wrong with the U.S. Constitution; whatever weakness there might be to exploited is actually not contained within the document itself but in the American Public’s willing ignorance, predatory vice, apathetic temperament and increasingly narcissistic cravings.
Mirror of Image:
The fact remains that the complexion of the Courts, Congress, the White House (and much of the legislature and executives of each of the 50 States and their lesser/local governments) is a mirror image of the American Publics expectations and their personal animus as to the world around them.
If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was & never will be. – T. Jefferson
The Polarity of Isms:
The easiest way to divide a Country is to permutated division thru the use of the False Premise; Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Tea Party, Pro-Life, Pro-Choice, African-American, Italian-American, Chinese-American and the list goes on and on. These are all illusions, these are each (as well as the near infinite composition of predatory self-centered mechanics) expressions of divided interests at odds with the most critical component of true Representative Government; the convergence upon The Common Ideal. Regardless of what one feels about their personal “ism” and/or that which they assign companionship the fact remains that to promote any of them beyond the Common Ideal requires the imposition of force, the requiem of dominant authority over those in decent or over those who simply don’t care either for or that you have an “ism” allegiance. The Polarity of Isms is simply incompatible with Representative Government; the “ism” is both tyranny of thought and tyranny in action.
Freedom and its expresser, Liberty, are largely misunderstood and for this reason they have each become ignored and replaced with the urge of impulse.
The Founding Fathers understood the risk of totalitarian metaphors and how easily a lethargic populous could fall victim to it. Freedom and its expresser, Liberty, are largely misunderstood and for this reason they have been quietly replaced by the urge of impulse. To understand the fundamental principles of Representative Government is to understand that they do not occur in a vacuum and neither do they occur individually; Freedom only occurs when you are bound to the true principal that lies back of Liberty and so ones concept of Freedom exists only to the extent there is a non-severable intellectual companionship with the following:
“Though you may be Free to do; you may not be at Liberty to do so.”
The essence of all this, the core philosophy essential to the containment of Government in the context of Representative Democracy, is the very same and truly remarkable mechanism so magnificently weaved within and about the Constitution and its enabling document, The Declaration of Independence. Government must never be given the chance to impose but merely “TO MAKE REGULAR”(1) those things, and only those things, which effect the Common Ideal, that which in action appeals to the Higher Ideals of Representative Democracy and not to the consensus of the lowest possible common denominator (a.k.a., the Political Compromise).
(1) “To make regular” is the literal definition of the word “regulate” at the time of the Constitution’s drafting. It was not “Discretionary and select reform, modification, restriction or containment.”
To impose, as sacred or as the greatest possible outcome, the Lowest Possible Common Denominator is merely to vacate the Common Ideal; to so narrowly define the outcome of consensus that only the very select few are its beneficiaries while the majority is leveraged with the consequent burden is itself a false premise as it asserts that there is no better option or achievable alternative. To best understand what the Common Ideal actually is requires one to understand that it is the complete antithesis of the Lowest Possible Common Denominator; it is neither consensus nor is it accommodation and sadly this has become the attribute of Politicized Democratic Rule which is itself a tyrannical exercise. It rallies the following into a state of mind and physical conditions in such a manner that the following truth is a philosophical and practical absolute:
“Man must be Free for Independence to be at Liberty to be Expressed.”
Any Government that does not preserve, protect and promote this native component, also integral to the ultimate expression of the human spirits divinely composed intention, is undeniably adverse to the Common Ideal and those mechanisms and attributes that are a natural expression of the same; there is no middle-ground, there is only one or the other.
You want your Freedom and the Liberty to Express it? Then by God do something about it! Ascend to the Common Ideal and then you can have cause to demand that your authority be spoken to and acted upon. Until then the American Public is no different than the very processes claimed to be the source of their victimization. Until then we will continue to limp along faintly, at times, kissing the veil of our greatest potential only to, once again, descend to the dismissive nature of the Lowest Possible Common Denominator.
To my mind, and I’m certain to many of yours, I believe we are called to this cause; we are intended to prevail; we are required to ensure its occurring.
Yes, and so long as it is rigorously defined and contained, an Article V Convention would be a remarkable expression of a truly functional Representative Democracy in action but then again, it also requires one to ponder the cause of its necessity, the prohibitions in place that have been surrendered, and whether the pretext for action should, in actuality, be our first cause of action.
Curtis C. Greco, Founder