Pages

Enemies of Liberty are ruthless. To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..

Enemies of Liberty are ruthless.  To own your Liberty, you'd better come harder than your enemies..
**TO ALL .GOV WATCHING MY LIFE** You already know I am playing by all the rules. If you want to talk to me, just call or knock on the door. I'll meet you at your place, or invite you into mine. But there is no need to shoot my dogs or frighten my wife. Just so you know. ~ Kerodin

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

III Congress: Is it worth it?


I believe men have failed to remain within the parameters of the Constitution and BoR, and that is the root of the evil.

Anti-Constitutionalists tend to believe it is the documents fault. I consider that line of reasoning to be a psychotic break with reality. No piece of paper can defend itself.  That is self-evident for any rational Soul.

The other day I ran a post off the cuff as a result of several posts offered by TL calling for a national organization that helped connect the dots between disparate units.  To this day he refuses to take point or set parameters for such an organization.

I shrugged, and said "why not."  I posted that I had a minimum requirement for CA and TL to participate, and all members sign an oath to Restoration of the Constitution.  Knowing some people want to secede, I mentioned that once Restoration had been achieved, they could carry on with their personal goals for secession, or catching the tail of a comet, whatever.

About 2 years ago, CA was one of several community writers who joined in a book project arguing for Restoration.  I figured such an oath would be a no-brainer. 

Surprise. 

Here is my current thinking: The Liberty movement would benefit from a national presence.  The Liberty Movement is diminished by anti-Constitutionalists, for we are working at crossed-purposes.  The argument made by Anti-Constitutionalists that "...we are all on the same team..." just because we all want some nebulously defined version of "Liberty" is, in my world, a fallacy.

Anti-constitutionalists injure the cause of Liberty in today's America for many ideological reasons and realpolitik reasons

I have come to understand that the Liberty outlined by the DoI and implemented for the real world in the Constitution and BoR, is a specific recitation of Liberty, as close as one can come to Rightful Liberty unless stoned on acid and living in dream land.

I am prepared to go forward with a national organization for a III Congress as recently detailed without CA and any other Anti-Constitutionalist.  It is nothing personl against CA - it is that I now consider anti-Constitutionalists counter-produtive to Liberty in America.

Is a III Congress worthwhile investment of our energy and resources?

If you say yes, I will be moving forward with no further use for anti-Constitutionalists regarding the III Congress.  (The Citadel operates under a different paradigm, anti-constitutionalists allowed)

Answer now or forever hold your piece.

Kerodin
III

25 comments:

  1. No, it is not worth the resources at this current moment. Such a movement needs to be developed from the bottom up, not the top down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon: The bottom is already formed, and can grow.

      K

      Delete
  2. Is a III Congress worthwhile investment of our energy and resources?

    Why?

    Exposure. The more people, and the faster we reach them, the better. It'll give us a larger pool of prospective candidates for the Citadel, as well as a much larger pool of allies who will not be cross-purpose to us.

    As I posted on TL's blog, in response to Klein:

    I meant it as I wrote it. Sans of course being 'without'. The way I meant it is that if people don't support the Constitutional VALUES, regardless of what's written, it won't make a bit of difference.

    Whether there was a Constitution or not, most people would still not follow the ideas that it espouses within it's pages. The Constitution wasn't written for US. US being 'modern Americans'. As a whole, we're far too ignorant and lazy en masse. It was written for a much more enlightened, educated, and reverent people than we. Or at the very least, a much LESS brainwashed people.

    People don't follow the Constitution, because they've been indoctrinated to be indifferent to it, and many, even when they do read it, do not understand the plain English in which it is written.

    We are told that we need 'experts' to 'interpret' it, like it is not somehow written in language so simple that a layman should be able to understand it with ease. In fact, that was the intent by the Founders.

    If people followed the values, what was written would be irrelevant. We wouldn't NEED a Constitution. But those values are no longer adhered to and are only given lip service to. Long gone are the days when the public had an understanding of, and and adherence to, Constitutional principles. There were those amongst the Founders that believed that to even write our rights down and enumerate them, was in and of itself, a limiting factor, as they knew that future tyrants would use that list in a Napoleonic Law kind of fashion, where that which is not strictly permitted is forbidden. In other words, that those listed were our ONLY rights, and we didn't have any others, and that we were limited to the Constitution.

    Even amongst many people who's hearts are in the right place, I cringe whenever anyone says 'My Constitutionally 'granted' rights.' Guaranteed folks. Not granted.

    As you noted, an oath does not make them abide by the Constitution. Bust most of this is out of ignorance. They don't really understand that oath. It's not taught or reinforced. If we had a culture that did so, the problem would self-correct on that front.

    To whit: The Constitution has not failed us. We've failed to adhere to IT.

    The document is worthless for a people who do not have the spine to live simple principles of Liberty.

    Heck, the Constitution, and especially the BoR could be called a 'Liberty For Dummies'

    Freedom of speech and religion? Duh. Right to keep and bear arms as a check vs a tyrannical govt? Duh. No troops in my house without my permission? Duh. Safe from unwarranted searches and seizures? Double duh.

    That 'ain't rocket science' either.

    In the end, I think that anyone who argues from an Anti-Constitutional point, intellectually, has to ask themselves what the end goal is, and if it is worth it to set aside said 'Anti-Constitutional' viewpoint for the ability to achieve the endgoal.

    I think it is. I have no problem taking such an oath. And I can't really imagine that really would, or why they would.

    There's nothing saying that the Constitution cannot be clarified after it's Restored and actually 'real world' functional again. Then the Anti-Constitutionalists can have a field day petitioning to have added whatever they like to 'fix' the document so that it's airtight and impermeable to tyranny based upon the lessons learned over 225 years.

    But hey... let's give the old girl some CPR first, before we try to shag her, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  3. There should have been a 'Yes' after that first line.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sam,

    Yes it is, and I am in.

    Bill Nye

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me put it as simply as possible.
      Anarchy is for Mogadishu and hippy communes.

      EVERY SINGLE patriot that I trust with the well being of my family, and my life have taken that Oath.

      I have ZERO use for people who don't know the difference between CONSENSUAL cooperative Leadership and Dictatorial Coercive Collectivism.

      Sadly, I think they will go to their mass graves spouting..."But I am an INDIVIDUAL, I have rights!"



      Sam check your mail.

      Delete
  6. There definitely requires a III Congress. I have spoken with too many Patriots who followers waiting for that leader to emerge.

    Do not mistake what I am saying. Every movement needs and requires followers and supporters. The difficulty of initiating a movement arises when the leadership is not clear-cut and visible. The Founding Fathers resolved this issue with the DoI. They declared who the leaders of the movement were with a resounding Declaration!

    Many people are just looking to someone to take the first steps. Not everyone will follow immediately, but some will. The remainder will wait to see if the leadership are going to remain steady or fall away.

    To sum it all up. Yes, the time is now! or it will be to late.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I will take the oath to Support and Defend the COTUS, BoR, and DoI.

      I will start a $10 monthly support for the Congress in December!

      Delete
  7. Yes, it is worth the time
    and effort.
    What are we immortals, with
    millennia of time on our hands.
    Count me in.

    cavmedic68w.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I have already told you that I'm in K. Nothing has changed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Disclaimer: I am not anti-Constitution. However I take issue with some statements made above.

    "I have come to understand that the Liberty outlined by the DoI and implemented for the real world in the Constitution and BoR, is a specific recitation of Liberty, as close as one can come to Rightful Liberty unless stoned on acid and living in dream land."

    Those who fought the war of independence to implement the DoI were living in Rightful Liberty quite nicely until 1787/1789. Yes, there were some issues of funding, etc.

    True Jeffersonians were appalled by the product of the Constitutional Convention of 1787. The document was perceived by a large portion of the people in this land as a nationalist power-grab by the Hamiltonians. It was nearly defeated. Read the Anti-Federalist writings of the period.

    The BoR was demanded by certain State conventions as a guarantee against encroachments clearly anticipated and validated in history.

    Do I want to see the national government of these united States pruned back to the constraints of the Constitution? Yes !

    Back to the minimal government of the Articles of Confederation? HELL yes !

    Do I feel I should be required to swear alliegance to a document to participate in a discussion to return us to a state of Rightful Liberty? HELL no.

    I wish you well in your endeavor to create the Congress, but regret you choose to exclude me from the proceedings.

    Hans
    A "De-Constructed Yankee" living in the NC woods

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hans: The reason for requiring the oath: Too mny times I have entered into good-faith conversations with people regarding how to restore the Constitution, only to find out they are lying and have anti-Constitutional agendas. Baugh and AP specifically.

      This organization is 100% committed to Restoration, hence the oath to weed out the game-players. Some will still slip in, but they will forever reveal themselves, publicly, as liars.

      K

      Delete
  10. Well, I guess I'm going to be the contrarian here. I say NO, it is not worth the resources and effort that it will require. And let's not delude ourselves...it WILL take the majority of the III's effort and resources. You're taling about starting that mythical third party to challenge to Dem and Rep bottom feeders. THAT takes grass roots, TIME, MONEY and RESOURCES. Take all those same things and apply them to the Citadel, and which better serves our goals? I think the Citadel. It will take DECADES to get any true political power resident under our control. AQnd even IF/WHEN we become a force to be reckoned with, the Dems and Reps will unite to defeat us...they WANT to remain in power, no matter what. They care NAUGHT for Liberty, the DoI, BoR or the Constitution UNLESS it serves their needs. Taking them on, on their own ground, with their already established political machines is insanity. And anyone who wants to throw back at me and say "but THAT'S what the Founding Fathers did against England" is smoking a HUGE crack pipe. There are no true parallels between that struggle and what we face today. I am not prepared, nor desirous, of dedicating DECADES to fight on THEIR terms (politically) to affect change with our Nation. I am willing to what I can to defeat what they currently force upon Americans, in an effort to slow the decline...but I do so ONLY to ensure I, my family, my friends, and the III are prepared, settled and ready for the collapse so WE can pick up the pieces and "reboot" our Nation. I think we delude ourselves by even thinking "hey, we can make a change" in the current political scene. YES, we can, LOCALLY (i.e. Benewah county, Idaho, the Redoubt), but nationally we are (to use a football metaphor) looking to play above our division. I say: Stay local, build the Citadel, build Tribe, fortify the Redoubt, teach our families and children, and be standing by to pick up the pieces of the inevitable collapse. THAT is going to happen within the next decade at the most...I think most of us see that. Can we really make our presence MEANINGFUL on the national political in a decade? I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fuzzy: We have no intention to become a political party to challenge the Rs or Ds, but I haven't had a chance to flesh it out. I'll get to it.

      The organization will enhance the Citadel and III Arms, but won't take any time away from either.

      Give me til next week to start fleshing it out. The rest of this week is dedicated to the Citadel, much work to do with our IT guy on the website.

      K

      Delete
    2. Sam, wilco. I'll dial it down from full-speed-ahead to economical cruise (yeah, too many years in the Navy). I kinda went off there, but there's been too much talk (here and other blogs) about starting a movement to affect political change, blah, blah, blah. I'll have no part in that. IF on the other hand, this is simply a way of solidifying the III (and those who don't already know they are part of the III) into a cohesive Tribe ready to deal with ANY situation, then I'm on board 100% and will back our efforts physically and financially.

      Delete
    3. Fuzzy: It doesn't need to succeed or even compete with the Dems or Repubs.

      It merely needs to make enough noise to be NOTICED.

      The rest will take care of itself.

      We stand no chance in hell of voting liberty in, nor should we ever expect to. This isn't about that, in my estimation. It's about a resounding clarion call that will reach across the din and be heard 'round the world.

      We don't need to compete with those people. All we need to do is let people know we exist. They'll do the rest themselves. People are hungry for this.

      We're divided and leaderless. Many are waiting for some simple sign of cohesion. People have had enough, and they WILL respond.

      All of that energy that has been generated by the secession movement has to go somewhere, and we'd be fools not to harness it to a positive use.

      Most folks don't really want true secession, they want the Constitution restored. They want our Republic restored. It's something many people of all walks of life mostly agree upon.

      We can do this.

      Delete
  11. I say Yes. But I'll suggest the foundation needs to be strengthened, by changing the view of people who are in the group of "Or at the very least, a much LESS brainwashed people." as Wild Cookery typed, but starting at the local level-county and state-in the mountain states. That shouldn't be difficult, my guess is more people than not who live there already share the majority of the perspective that this discussion has been focused on.

    I don't think the effort will be successful on the national level, unless there's more time left than seems to be the case, too many people are apathetic or uncaring, also as WC outlined above. If I'm wrong, great, that will be a benefit for Sam's efforts, if I'm right then those of us who make it to the redoubt area can start there with the restoration.

    There will be several ugly years, but with like minded neighbors survivable years.

    It's almost time, Patriots, stand ready.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grog: If the national can help put OVM's grew in touch with a crew in, say, Florida that they never knew existed, the national will have done its job. Everything else is gravy.

      K

      Delete
  12. Sam, I'm in 111% The opportunity to do this is quickly fading.

    Regarding the Oath. I have no qualms whatsoever with that. Something I believe people are failing to realize is that once the Constitution is restored, the oath is fulfilled and we would no longer be bound by it. After that they are free to persue whatever rewrite or AofC restore they choose.

    I also agree with TL, if we do not have a national organization to step into the vacuum after collapse, we can be damn sure that whatevers left of our corrupt government will. Only a fool would believe they don't have a contingency plan for that. Picking up the pieces afterwards will be near impossible without networks already in place.

    RedWulf

    ReplyDelete
  13. Congratulations...I always like it when someone gets what they work for. Well, as long as it's for their own sake anyway, and you qualify. I do think you may run into that "splintering" problem and I agree with Fuzzy about resources, but I'd be quite the hypocrite if I were to say that should be some reason for YOU not to achieve what YOU desire. And I'm no hypocrite.

    I'll ask only one philosophical favor...stay away from the damn collectivism, willya? Whether you believe it or not, the battle has ALWAYS been between individualism and collectivism. This is going to be the first time ever that individualism wins, and you heard it here first.

    Good luck, K. I for one could be easily persuaded to support and abide a Constitution. But know this---people like me, and there are a ton of us, won't ever be intimidated again.

    Opposing the Bad Guys is always an admirable goal, and living as a Good Guy is an even better one. I think I'll go have a drink to your success at that. Cheers.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "...because we all want some nebulously defined version of 'Liberty'..."

    But it isn't nebulous, is it? Look back at that III Mission Statement. That says it all. Clearly. With no wiggle room. Anything that doesn't violate that is OK, anything that does is not. I just don't think the Constitution lives up to that noble ideal very well.

    I am not an "anti-constitutionalist"; I just see it as a placebo.

    However, as always, I will stand for your right to organize around the Constitution as a rallying point, hopeful that if the day comes where you have "enough liberty" you won't prevent me from working for more.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hi Kerodin,

    I agree with Jim in that the battle has always been fought
    between those of a collectivist bent and those who are of a individualist bent (Bona Na Croin comes to mind).

    I have to ask, what your thoughts are regarding Kenneth
    Royce's book, Hologram of Liberty regarding the Constitution as a working/functional document/principal.

    Yours In Liberty & Good Self-government!
    Northgunner III

    ReplyDelete
  16. I'm in.

    For one reason only. It is the right thing to do.

    ReplyDelete

This blog is about issues.

This blog is NOT about Kerodin.

If you post Anon: Stay on topic and the world will spin properly. You will not be permitted to flame from cover.

Be on topic or be away.