Earlier today I was musing about life. I thought about the craziness on the news, or at least what passes for news these days. I thought about life, and my grandparents. I thought about buying my first hamburger when I was six years old; my father gave me a few dollars and pointed me in the direction of the local diner. I was on my own. I wonder if you could do that today, in the hyper-PC culture that America has become.
All of these thoughts jumbled together when a commercial came on promoting an “in depth” study on how bad Trump is. With this and the latest local news, I suddenly came to the thought; What would the founders of the United States think about the nation as it is today? What would they think?
Obviously they wouldn’t be happy.
I've told this story a thousand times... I once made a pot of chili. It was on a lazy Saturday afternoon. It was something that I had been looking forward to having all week long, and Saturday was just perfect for making it. I added the ground beef, the peppers, the tomatoes, the onions, and let it cook for hours on the stove. I then lifted up the lid and added some salt and pepper. I reached for the parsley container. I wanted to add small amount for flavoring. When the entire lid fell off the container. There, in a nano-second was a huge pile of green parsley slowly sinking into the chili. I knew that I had to take action and fast. So, I reached in and with a ladle, I managed to remove about 80% of the parsley. Yet, as successful as I was, it was too late. The chili was far too polluted, and all you could do when you tasted it was the strong and noticeable taste of parsley. What to do? What to do? I didn't want to throw away the chili. There was good ground beef in it. It took time to cut up all the vegetables, and I had the beans all ready and added. I did not want to toss it all away when the house still held the wonderful aroma of cooking chili. So my plan was to keep on adding things. I figured that if the pot of chili was larger, by adding more and more things, eventually the effect of the parsley would be so diluted to be unnoticeable. As a result I would have double or triple the amount of chili, at no negative consequence to the taste, I believed. So... I made and added more sauce. No change. I cooked and added more meat. No change. I added more tomatoes. No change. I added more beans. No change. I added more garlic, leeks, onions. No change. I added more salt, and more pepper. No change. By the end of the day, I had a much larger pot of chili. Of which was just as uneatable due to the pollution of the parsley. ------ Sometimes, small changes greatly alter content. You end up with something completely different. Often, it is not what you intended, but "the cat is out of the bag, and there is no way to put it back." Further changes and alterations do not help. You end up with a "Frankenstein monster". What I should have done was scrapped the chili. Started all over again. I should have stuck to the original recipe, as explicitly stated to me by my grandmother, and avoided such embellishments such as parsley that a well-meaning friend insisted upon.
When I look at the mess that the United States is today, a scene from the movie “Aliens” come to mind. Do you know which one that I am referring to?
You know, they just discovered a “nest” of horrible alien insect-like killing machines that almost completely wiped out the military platoon of Space Marines. They are all there in the APC, and wondering what to do about this horrible situation. And then Ripley suggests…
In the case of the United States, the “well meaning” (and not so well-meaning) changes has resulted in a real mess for us citizens that have to live inside it. This is a truth, whether you want to believe it or not. The only people that thrive in the United States today is the wealthy elite class. For they enjoy their own laws, their own communities, and their very own protections.
In my mind, I would like to revert America way back to the Constitution AS WRITTEN, and include ONLY the first ten amendments. Personally, I see an uneducated populace, that even when they attend university, remain under-educated. They behave in group-think, or better yet a “mob mentality” where popularity, as defined by news, polls and tweets define action.
I know that it is intended to be this way. I know that total control over a population is best served when they devolve into emotional-laden mob physiology. I wish that we could revert to more traditional ways of living, and one in which the rich and powerful were held in check.
But, ah, that’s just me.
So anyways, musing about life and my “Rights”, has got me to thinking. I wonder, what would the founders think about specific issues? You know about “LGBT rights”, illegal aliens as opposed to citizens, and a moral-less society based on social constructs as opposed to natural biology. What would they think?
What, if you could teleport one (or more) of the founders here, somehow erase the shock of modern-day life, and query them in a calm and safe environment. What would they think? What would their views be?
Here, I try to address those thoughts.
Let’s start with elections. It’s one of those things that we are all taught back in grade school. Oh, you know “Our nation is great because we have popular elections. It is what makes our democracy so great and wonderful.” Um, yeah, but we are not a “democracy”, at least we weren’t ever intended to be one.
[1] Popular Elections
When the United States was first founded, it was intended that ONLY the heads of a family would be able to vote. They would vote for their local governance, and they would also vote for their national representative. Aside from that, no one else would be able to vote.
Thus the profile of a voter was…
- Male head of a family.
- Educated.
- Member of a local church.
- Responsible for the welfare of his family.
This was from a practical perspective. The heads of families were responsible for others. It was a huge burden that (at that time) was taken quite seriously. Therefore, only those people that had others that relied on them, could be permitted to vote.
This, of course, ended with the passage of the various amendments 11 – 27, which almost all expanded the voting pool while making no changes in the representation structure. Thus, diluting the individual voter influence.
What would the founders think?
I believe that they would think something like this…
Without governance under the control of people with a “stake in the game”, the entire government can be gamed in favor of mob rule. Thus the idea of a pure Republic becomes meaningless.
Instead, you have a democracy by mob rule. This is a fundamental principle that must be adhered to, in order to maintain consistency and quality in governance. Otherwise, under “mob rule” an oligarchy can take over and manipulate the people to fit their desires.
It is easy to control mobs, as mob psychology is a very mature subject. You just control the news media. You control public discourse by popularity, and control polls, tweets, and fashion. All of which lie within reach and within the domain of the wealthy. NOT in the domain of the general population.
[2] Taxation
Today, in America taxation is broken down into four classes.
- Federal taxation,
- State taxation,
- Local taxation,
- Fees, and other charges, that originate from the government.
Any mechanism that extracts money from citizens to a governmental body, no matter the form or name is a tax. Additionally, you have the ObamaCARE which is a mandated item that MUST be purchased by citizens.
What would the founders think?
We made it very and specifically clear. There shall be NO taxation on any American citizen in any way, shape or form. There is no excuse or reason what-so-ever that can justify the taxation of Americans.
The moment that Americans are taxed is the moment that they lose their freedom and become slave and serfs for someone else.
[3] First Amendment
Today the freedom of speech and religion are under constant assault. There is something called “PC, which stand for “Political Correctness”, which means that there are limits what you can say and what you cannot say. This means that there are limits on your thoughts and what you can or cannot believe. It all must be approved by others.
What would the founders say?
We were very explicit in this. We specifically explained in the preamble to the Bill of Rights that the government shall have NO (that means zero) ability in altering or changing, or influencing a persons’ thoughts, religion or beliefs. Nor shall they place any limits on it, for any reason what so ever.
People, you need to read the PREAMBLE to the Bill of Rights. You need to read the Federalist Papers. It explains everything so plainly. Anyone who is trying to limit your ability to speak your mind is a tyrant in sheeps’ clothing.
Second Amendment
Today, we see a nearly unending media hype on banning guns and all sort of ways and means to restrict it’s usage. Every day, it seems that there is some sort of “event” involving gun. From the mob abuse in Chicago to the latest in “false flag” mass slaughter events.
I am sure that the founders would have some very serious and harsh words to say on this subject.
What would the founders say..
We specifically put the words “shall not be infringed” in the specification. It is very clear. This is as clear as night and day.
The people; the citizens of the United States WILL have the ability to procure and operate any and all sorts of weapons. And, yes, that means the latest in military technology. It is the ONLY way that people can control their government. Take that away and the people cannot redress their government. They just cannot.
America was founded on one basic premise. That is that man is created by God, and given Rights. Governments are made by men. For a government to be long-lasting, it must recognize that it can NEVER replace God.
Third Amendment
The third amendment is very clear. The government shall not use your property for their purposes. In worst case, even in times of war, your property is yours. The government shall not infringe on your property.
Today, of course, your property can be taken away if you owe taxes. It can be seized by the police. It can be utilized as needed, and it can be occupied. What would the founders have to say about this?
Property is owned by citizens. The government shall have no say what so ever in using it, renting it, taxing it, or anything else. Including banning it. The moment when you need to discuss your “property” with the government is the moment that you are a slave. For you have no property.
Fourth Amendment
The fourth amendment prohibits The United States government from going into people’s private lives, collecting their personal papers and documents, and using that against them. It’s what it says.
However, that is pretty much how it is done today.
Oh, there are of course, “excuses”, and alterations in methodology, but the fact is pretty plain. There are no longer any fourth amendment protections for Americans today. Zero.
After all, if the Fourth Amendment was being followed there wouldn’t be anything called the “Utah Data Collection Center”.
“This is more than just a data center,” an official source close to the project told the online magazine Wired.com. The source says the center will actually focus on deciphering the accumulated data, essentially code-breaking. This means not only exposing Facebook activities or Wikipedia requests, but compromising “the invisible” Internet, or the “deepnet.” Legal and business deals, financial transactions, password-protected files and inter-governmental communications will all become vulnerable. Once communication data is stored, a process known as data-mining will begin. Everything a person does – from traveling to buying groceries – is to be displayed on a graph, allowing the NSA to paint a detailed picture of any given individual’s life.
What would the founders of the nation have to say about this?
One of the fundamental characteristics of being a free man is the idea of having privacy. That is you can have your thoughts, you documents, you life, and your family private and free from scrutiny. The failure in having this most basic of needs is to live the life of a slave.
We are not going to put it any other way. Only SLAVES have their personal papers, business and privacy invaded by governments. Nor violated by private companies who operate as proxies for the government.
Well, you do need to protect yourself from the government. Here’s a good way to do it…
Fifth Amendment
You know that the things that you do, your habits, and your lifestyle cannot be used against you. Funny, apparently the United States government has forgotten this most basic of rights.
The United States was founded under British common law. Which means that there can be no crime without a victim. You steal an apple from someone, you have a victim. You kill someone. That dead SOB is a victim. You slander someone, you have a victim. There is no such thing as a "victim-less" crime. Thus, all the crimes against drugs, vices, personal behaviors, and the sort that are often promoted by progressives "to make the world a better place", and to do things "for the children" would NEVER be permitted if the Constitution was being followed as written.
This amendment requires that procedure be followed in bringing a person to trial. It mandates that the government cannot seize land and property from citizens without “due cause” and compensation. Thought today, this happens pretty darn regularly.
Not to mention their wanton abuse of access to social media.
People need to be protected from the government. In our view, the government was constructed to be a rather weak entity. One that had little power aside from organization, and could in no way interfere in the lives and property of the citizens. A government that is TOO POWERFUL is one that can take away things and lifestyle from it’s citizens.
In a free society, vices are not banned, taxed, suppressed or prohibited. A “vice” is simply something that a busybody wants to limit YOUR access to, so that they have power and control over you.
Sixth Amendment
The sixth amendment is in regard to fair, and speedy trials. Yet we know that today, most criminal prosecutions do not go to trial. ” and that way are resolved outside the court system.
In doing so, the entire protections of the Bill of Rights are circumvented. Those accused are faced with either fighting an enormous bureaucratic entity with an unlimited funding source, or accept a minor charge by pleading guilty.
Unfortunately, most accused people are set in the situation where they would rather than go through the “grinder” of the legal justice system in favor of a light or lighter sentence.
The judicial system was set up to be fair. There should be ZERO opportunities for a person to avoid the criminal prosecution system. The system was set up to be fair. It protected those who were wrongfully accused, and punished those who did wrong.
Abuses of this is evidence in that either [1] Criminals are in charge of the justice system, or [2] The laws are unrealistic and do not reflect the needs of society as a whole.
Seventh Amendment
The idea behind that the seventh amendment is that a person’s peers would determine what to do with a person who exists within their circle of associations. While, over the years, society has expanded and communication methods have greatly expanded, the need still persists.
People need to be judged by their peers. Their behavior outside of their social constraints could be misconstrued. People who live in urban areas shouldn’t be judged by people who live in rural areas. Everything should be handled at the local level. The entire concept of this resides in the fundamental idea that everything must be resolved at the local level.
Eighth Amendment
Well, Americans are protected from “excessive” punishment, and “excessive” bail. Though I would be hard pressed (in my case) to equate that 300x my bank savings for bail is within these guidelines.
But that is just me. Obviously I am a “unique” case. No one else had this problem. Eh?
The Government should remain small and manageable. The idea behind the eighth amendment was to offer a “level playing field” between the accused and the government. All too often, though out history, the government had the power an resources to overwhelm the average citizen. This amendment was a way to prevent the government from being far too powerful.
Ninth Amendment
The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution addresses rights, retained by the people, that are not specifically enumerated in the Constitution. It is part of the Bill of Rights. The Ninth Amendment has generally been regarded by the courts as negating any expansion of governmental power on account of the enumeration of rights in the Constitution. -Wikipedia.
Many people are confused by this amendment.
Let’s say this plainly. The govern CANNOT lay claim to any ability, right or process that lies outside of the Bill of Rights. They cannot expand up statutes for “the public good” or any such nonsense.
People have a large number of Rights that the government should never infringe upon. This was intended to a be protection of the people. It was intended to be a protection from the citizens from their government. It specifically states quite clearly that American citizens have RIGHTS that are not specified within the Constitution. Therefore, any new law, or policy from the government extracts from the Rights of Citizens.
Like, perhaps, the right to drink from a straw…
The Tenth Amendment
People. Know your history.
Powell entered Seward’s house pretending to deliver medicine while Herold waited out front. Powell pushed his way past Seward’s butler, who ran into the night to get help. This frightened Herold, who immediately took off.
Once inside, Powell attempted to shoot Seward’s son Frederick, but his revolver misfired. Powell beat him to the floor and made his way to the room where Seward was recovering. The Secretary of State was being tended to by his daughter and by Sergeant George F. Robinson, an army nurse. Powell slashed Robinson and punched Seward’s daughter in the face. He then climbed atop Seward and stabbed and slashed at his head and neck.
Because of his injuries from the carriage accident, Seward was wearing a metal splint around his jaw. This protected him from any would-be fatal blows, but Powell managed to slash his cheek and face. Though he survived the attack, the scars would remain with Seward for life.
Seward’s other son Augustus burst into the room and wrestled with Powell. Powell slashed at Augustus and got away, but not before encountering a messenger in the hallway (who Powell stabbed, as well).
Powell escaped, but he was a stranger on the run in Washington, D.C. Helpless without Herold, he disappeared for three days, wandering the streets or hiding alone. Finally, he returned to the boarding house where Booth and the other conspirators rendezvoused before the assassination. As he got there, police were taking the owner of the house and others away for questioning. Powell claimed he was just a laborer there to dig a gutter, but the police were suspicious because he was wearing expensive clothing, so they took him into custody when he was positively identified.
Yeah. I know. Tenth amendment. “States Rights”.
Anything not specified in the Constitution is reserved for the States. At least that is what it says. Of course, we all know that this is just nothing; it’s all just meaningless words. The Civil War pretty much settled this issue.
It’s a hard sell.
The issue of “Federalism” pretty much was killed in favor of a centralized government operating out of Washington D.C..
We can parse this trivial issue or that one, all by carefully waltzing around the elephant in the room; you know which one. Don’t you?
Let me spell it out to you. If States have no ability to dissolve their bonds with Washington, they have zero power in anything substantive.
But going beyond that. Let’s look at the issue in more depth, shall we. Well, people, where does it explicitly state that there should be a FCC, a FDA, or a ATF in the Constitution? According to the tenth amendment, these are state’s issues.
And even more perplexing, is that these are issues that infringe on the inherent Rights of citizens within the states where they reside. Since when can the federal government create an agency that places limits on the freedoms of any citizen in any of the states? Well?
The Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. It expresses the principle of federalism and states' rights, which strictly supports the entire plan of the original Constitution for the United States of America, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the United States Constitution. All remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people. -Wikipedia
It doesn’t matter though.
Today, we have an American empire run by an oligarchy. Many of who’s members aren’t even Americans. (You can see who they are by looking at all the non-American interests being funded in the yearly federal budget.) They engage in endless wars around the globe, and treat American citizens as ignorant sheep to be fleeced every April.
What would the founders have to say about all this…
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
The truths…
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Then, men create governments to make sure that people RETAIN these God-given Rights…
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
However, take note and warning…
That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government.
This should not be taken lightly…
Accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
How much can people take before they start to yell “STOP!”?
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Such has been the patient sufferance of these citizens; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
The history of the present United States is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations… all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over the citizens.
Conclusion
The United States today in zero ways resembles what it was established to be in 1776. It has changed.
It is no longer a Republic.
It was altered from a Republic to a Democracy, to an Empire, and now exists as a oligarchy that serves the interests of the richest people on the globe. Many of whom aren’t even Americans in the first place.
The only way that we can change America from what it has become is …
Posts Regarding Life and Contentment
Here are some other similar posts on this venue. If you enjoyed this post, you might like these posts as well. These posts tend to discuss growing up in America. Often, I like to compare my life in America with the society within communist China. As there are some really stark differences between the two.
Posts about the Changes in America
America is going through a period of change. Change is good… that is, after it occurs. Often however, there are large periods of discomfort as the period of adjustment takes place. Here are some posts that discuss this issue.
More Posts about Life
I have broken apart some other posts. They can best be classified about ones actions as they contribute to happiness and life. They are a little different, in subtle ways.
Stories that Inspired Me
Here are reprints in full text of stories that inspired me, but that are nearly impossible to find in China. I place them here as sort of a personal library that I can use for inspiration. The reader is welcome to come and enjoy a read or two as well.
Articles & Links
You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.
- You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
- You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
- You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
- You can find out more about the author HERE.
- If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
- If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.