Posted on 09/28/2016 6:11:24 AM PDT by Rummyfan
over the past half century, the Reagan years notwithstanding, our ruling class’s changing preferences and habits have transformed public and private life in America. As John Marini shows in his essay, “Donald Trump and the American Crisis,” this has resulted in citizens morphing into either this class’s “stakeholders” or its subjects. And, as Publius Decius Mus argues, “America and the West” now are so firmly “on a trajectory toward something very bad” that it is no longer reasonable to hope that “all human outcomes are still possible,” by which he means restoration of the public and private practices that made the American republic. In fact, the 2016 election is sealing the United States’s transition from that republic to some kind of empire.
Electing either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump cannot change that trajectory. Because each candidate represents constituencies hostile to republicanism, each in its own way, these individuals are not what this election is about. This election is about whether the Democratic Party, the ruling class’s enforcer, will impose its tastes more strongly and arbitrarily than ever, or whether constituencies opposed to that rule will get some ill-defined chance to strike back. Regardless of the election’s outcome, the republic established by America’s Founders is probably gone. But since the Democratic Party’s constituencies differ radically from their opponents’, and since the character of imperial governance depends inherently on the emperor, the election’s result will make a big difference in our lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at claremont.org ...
We made a huge mistake in allowing fringe, radical elements of our country to vote. Feminists. Humanists. Abuses from America's blacks in the name of civil rights.
There's no way to fix this mess. Pandora's box and all. But maybe a Trump presidency can slow down our collapse.
The Republic was lost on Usurpation Day, January 20, 2009
All of our elected and appointed oath takers stood around and watched a man who told us he was born a British subject be sworn in as President in direct violation of the Constitution.
The Kenyanesian Usurpation was brought to you by BOTH parties.
The Constitution says natural born citizen.
That means one who is naturally an American because they couldn’t be anything else, born here of citizen parents.
Everyone in DC wanted that changed without the hassle of amending the Constitution.
The Senate passed a resolution declaring McCain a natural born citizen because he had TWO citizen parents, even though he was born in Panama.
Then Obama runs and wins based on just being born here, even though he told us on his website he was born a British subject.
So the standard went from born here of citizen parents to just TWO citizen parents to just being born here in one election cycle without amending the Constitution.
This was done intentionally because Rubio (no citizen parents), Cruz (foreign birth, one citizen parent), Jindal (no citizen parents), and Haley (no citizen parents) were all ineligible and the future of the GOP.
The truth of the Kenyanesian Usurpation will never see the light of day because they all cooperated in the violation of the Constitution.
There are sound reasons for guaranteeing to every American, the uninfringed right of keeping and bearing arms and the one thing we can be sure of is, we will not be made more safe by eroding that right. Not. A. Chance.
Donald Trump has shown us who his SC justice picks will be. There is a world of difference between what we can expect from these picks and what we can expect from Hillary's picks.
This election is about protecting our Bill of Rights and preserving our national sovereignty and our Republic.
If you are interested in protecting and defending the Bill of Rights and preserving our national sovereignty and our Republic, you must vote for Donald Trump. There aren't too many other options.
The Republic was ‘lost’ long before Obama. You can thank Dubya Bush for putting what I think was the final nail in the coffin. You might recall Gonzales v Raich, which blew down the remaining barriers against federal reach in the US.
In dissent, Justice Thomas noted that as a result of the case, federal govt could regulate interstate, intrastate, and down to the level of church suppers.
One definition of a centralized government over powerless states is a ‘nation-state.’ Think of it as the Goodyear Blimp, a gas-filled balloon. A republic is more of a dirigible, with internal compartments. America, the gasbag.
Yeah and there was no way a band of revolutionaries could defeat the greatest Army on the face of the earth.Yet, Less than 1/3 of the citizens of the 13 colonies created the United States of America in spite of the 2/3 who preferred being British subjects. A greater percentage under Trump(Trump’s Troops) will turn the ship of state around on November 8th.
Maybe it all started with the tower of babel, and for us in America, 1913. The year of the progressive run on Freedom. Central bank, income tax of the people, and worst of all the downfall of State Sovereignty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West#Democracy.2C_media.2C_and_money
I don’t agree with EVERYTHING Spengler says... keep in mind he predicted this sort of thing though about 100 years ago.
That particular section is a good summary though. Including his concept of the eventual rise of a Caesar.
Codevilla has encapsulated 99% of what we talk about on FR in this article,just as he previously correctly named the bipartisan enemy, aka “Americas Ruling Class” several years ago. He cuts to the core and exposes the rot underneath.
Regardless of how it makes you feel, I strongly encourage everyone to take 15 minutes and read this piece comprehensively. We are entitled to our opinions, but not to our own reality.
The Republic officially died on on April 9th, 1865 at Appomattox, Va.
I agree that you can only fight today’s battle today and that it must be fought. I disagree that it’s winnable.
The only hope for decentralized government was the original plan where state power counterbalanced federal power. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments guaranteed a long march to what we have today and what’s in store for us over the horizon.
Even without those amendments, increasing complexity and technological developments would have presented a challenge to controlling central government growth, but at least the tool would have been available - its use would have depended on the public’s appreciation of their responsibility to vote on principals, not issues.
The reason it’s unwinnable is that today’s citizenry (I use that term loosely) has no concept of the principles of self government. If you don’t understand the principles involved in hitting a golf ball, you may hit one long and straight on occasion, but you could never do it consistently. And hitting a golf ball doesn’t involve clearing the path of others with bad motives.
I wonder why anyone thinks a giant nation-state centrally ruled is anything BUT an Empire?
And I wonder why anyone thinks this is a good thing.
For later
I’ve said before, crony capitalism and not international trade is our problem. Yes, the agreements are written to accommodate the multinationals. That is the problem. They eliminate competition and force the lowest labor cost - wages.
My gut tells me I should disagree and argue that the fight is winnable, but my brain tells me that sometimes you have to admit the cavalry is just not going to come riding in over the hill. I do hope you’re wrong, but wish I could say I disagree more strongly.
While I am a pessimist by nature, I see a couple of signs of hope from the new technology:
-Hackers can crash through the secrecy that the elites use to rule us.
-We could develop a technology that allowed us to detect lies and keep sociopaths from positions of power in all organizations.
-The elites that are the real problem are less than 1% of 1%. Numbers are on our side.
bump
And I wonder why anyone thinks this is a good thing.
_______
I also wonder why -- or whether -- anybody realistically thinks we can return to a government as small as we had in 1800 or 1900.
And I wonder why people believe that we weren't in some ways an empire even back then.
Most thinking persons would agree with the author's premise, that American empire is headed towards certain internal conflict. There is no possible reconciliation between either sides.
After the Republic, and IF the Constitution side wins, it will be a daunting task to ‘teach the current citizenry’ and revert back to the original intent as those Founding Fathers laid out.
*Some* form of ‘compromise’ will have to be reached, and hence, no longer the 1776 version.
>>> Had Cruz become the main alternative to the Democratic Party’s dominion, the American people might have been presented with the option of reverting to the rule of law. But that did not happen. Both of the choices before us presuppose force, not law. <<<
I also have to strongly disagree with the author's assertion that a Ted Cruz candidacy will bring us back to the rule of law! Not one iota 'effectively' nor to any practical purpose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.