Replies

Reverend Wright: "My basic assessment of authoritarians like Pinochet, Franco and Salazar is that, unlike “Constitutional Conservatives” they were able to protect their people and their countries from communists, anarchists and leftists."

First of all, I thank you for a full throated defense of your views and for not hiding them behind a smoke-screen of obfuscations.
At least we can know for certain who you are and what you believe, unlike so many others here.

And I understand that you are Canadian and therefore not born into the US Constitutional government and the centuries-long debates over what exactly is or is not appropriate constitutionally.
So, for you, US "constitution-speak" is a little like learning a second language as an adult -- no matter how hard you train, you can never really speak it without an accent.

Right now I'm out of time, so must summarize my responses.

The US Constitution has been under constant attack since Day One in 1787, with its most serious single challenge being the 1860s crisis of secession and Civil War.
Since roughly 1932 our Constitution has been bent, twisted and molded into conformity with modern Democratic Socialist ideals and globalists aspirations.
In all this time conservative Republicans are nearly always minorities, sometimes minorities within the Republican minority.
But on rare occasions Democrats have so mislead and abused Americans that we've elected Republican majorities to make things right again.
Ronald Reagan in the 1980s was one time, the 2024 reelection of Pres. Trump may be another.

As the Sardinian philosopher de Maistre famously observed in 1811:

"In a democracy people get the leaders they deserve. "

"Every country has the government it deserves"

The US Constitution debates are long and complicated, and I would not expect a Canadian to either understand them or subscribe uncritically to loyal support for the Constitution.

“As the Sardinian philosopher de Maistre famously observed in 1811:

“In a democracy people get the leaders they deserve. “

As it happens, my whole critique is heavily based on the ideas of deMaistre.

This Youtube guy also used to be a conventional constitutional conservative as well, but after 2020 he came to the conclusion that it was no longer viable.
(9 min)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZo2pEu3oog

“And I understand that you are Canadian and therefore not born into the US Constitutional government and the centuries-long debates over what exactly is or is not appropriate constitutionally.
So, for you, US “constitution-speak” is a little like learning a second language as an adult — no matter how hard you train, you can never really speak it without an accent.”

“The US Constitution debates are long and complicated, and I would not expect a Canadian to either understand them or subscribe uncritically to loyal support for the Constitution.”

You realize this constitutes a destructive critique of both Propositional Citizenship and creedal nationalism ?