Episode 8. April 21, 2019
CLP Topic Category: Social Justice and the Destruction of the American Rule of Law
Title: Driving a Stake Through the Heart of Democracy: Meathead’s Social Justice View of American Democracy.
Our podcast today delves into the socialist concept of democracy by examining the meaning of Meathead’s assertion that Trump and Barr are using the Mueller Report to “drive a stake through the heart of democracy.”
The key irreconcilable conflict between leftist Democrats and natural rights conservatives concerns the scope of the government’s power over the lives of individual citizens.
Our podcast explains how the definition of sovereignty fits into a democratic representative republic.
In contrast, the socialists have no concept of national, citizen or state government sovereignty because their concept of democracy contains no delimitation between citizens and the state.
In order to impose their totalitarian values of social justice, the government must be the unchallenged authority to administer social justice.
Social justice is seen by the left as the application of principles to make economic and financial outcomes of free market transactions fair, not to protect individual liberty by limiting the power of government.
I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for April 21, 2019.
Our podcast today is under the topic category Social Justice and the Destruction of the American Rule of Law, and is titled Driving a Stake Through the Heart of Democracy: Meathead’s Social Justice View of American Democracy.
The three most recent podcasts of the CLP News Network are available for free. The entire text and audio archive of our podcasts are available for subscription, at the CLP News Network.com.
The Left’s Concept of Democracy.
In his recent tirade against Trump, All In the Family actor, Meathead, explained the socialist concept of democracy.
Meathead said that Trump will use the Mueller Report to ‘Drive A Stake Through the Heart of Democracy.”
Meathead stated, “Trump, with the protection of cult GOP, FOX, & AG Barr, is in full gas light mode. We’ve seen Collusion & Obstruction in plain sight. Reality is reality. Truth is truth. Trust Your Eyes.”
Meathead explained, “If we give this possibly illegitimate president — who is under investigation for colluding with a foreign enemy power —another Supreme Court seat, it could change America is for the next 30, 40 years. Women’s rights, gay rights, workers’ rights, civil rights will all be on the table. We have to fight. We need the press more than ever.”
In other words, democracy, for the left, revolves around using the government to obtain social justice for victims of capitalist oppression.
Driving a stake through the heart of democracy, for Meathead, means that Trump would end the left’s identity group politics of social justice.
Meathead’s explanation is revealing in that the socialist definition of democracy has no concept of national sovereignty, citizen popular sovereignty, or state government sovereignty.
In socialism, democracy means the same thing as the all-powerful socialist state, a type of Leviathan that does not require citizen sovereignty to function.
The res publica of Democrats is social justice. Democracy means that outcomes are fair and citizens are equal, not that citizens participate in collective decision making.
If socialists ever succeed in eliminating political opposition, there are no parchment barriers in Madison’s constitution to limit the unchecked power of socialist tyrants, like Meathead, in converting America to a socialist tyranny.
America’s Three Leg Stool of Sovereignty.
Harold Laski addresses the issue of sovereignty in his book, Authority in the Modern State. His work extends the American concept of sovereignty by picking up where Hobbes, Locke and Jefferson left off.
Laski explains that the issue that sovereignty can be divided into external and internal sovereignty.
External, or national sovereignty, deals with issues like illegal immigration, international trade, and global climate change.
Internal sovereignty can be further divided into citizen sovereignty and state government sovereignty.
Internal citizen sovereignty addresses issues like private property and defense of civil liberties from the police state.
State government sovereignty addresses the proper division of power between the state governments and the centralized national government.
The basic irreconcilable conflict between socialists and conservatives concerns what power is ultimately sovereign in American democracy.
Following Jefferson’s social contract theory, when citizens of each state formed the Articles of Confederation, the citizens agreed to give up a part of their natural rights to secure greater protection from threats to liberty.
In exchange for losing part of their natural rights, the citizens obtained a justice system for legal redress for the protection of civil liberties and natural rights.
As Laski notes, “from the outset of modern history, the problem is raised as to the authority to be possessed by the state.”
This is the fundamental irreconcilable difference between socialists and natural rights conservatives, today.
“The “Green New Deal” isn’t so much about fighting global warming as it is about “social justice.” This is really about providing justice for communities and just transitions for communities,” said Democrat socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
For socialists, global warming requires an all-powerful global government that manages her Green Deal. The ultimate target of the green deal is to eliminate the free market to impose fair social justice outcomes.
For Obama, international trade and foreign policy means undoing national sovereignty and replacing it with the United Nations, as he did with the overthrow of Libya.
For the judges on the 9th District Court, President Trump does not have constitutional authority to enforce immigration policy.
According to that Court, only federal judges have a specific, enumerated, constitutional power to enforce immigration laws.
The logic of the 9th Court is not found in the Constitution, it is found in their allegiance to social justice.
For socialists, national sovereignty means white nationalism, racism, and imperialism.
In the United States sovereignty has resided in the people as a whole.
As described at the beginning of the nation, Chief Justice Jay said that when sovereignty passed from the Crown, sovereignty and the unappropriated lands of the country passed to the whole people.
Justice Wilson called the States a creature of the people and took the view that the people could make a state liable as they could make a corporation or natural persons liable.
Following Justice Jay, the Supreme Court has held that after the Declaration of Independence (1776) and before the adoption of the Articles of Confederacy (1781), the people were sovereign and Congress exercised for them such sovereign powers as waging war and establishing a prize court.
Under the United States Constitution, the doctrine of citizen sovereignty is the supreme authority.
In this interpretation, the power of the centralized government is not independent, unlimited, indivisible power to compel obedience, but in the narrow sense of the power is directed to protect personal liberty against centralized government tyranny.
To answer Lanski’s question as to who or what it is that is sovereign in the American representative republic, it is “We, the people.”
In the American representative republic, state sovereignty exists as a dual sovereignty to the national government.
The U. S. Supreme Court ruled that, “The police power, the power to enforce laws within their respective territories, was left to the states — left to the representative governments closest to the people whose lives, liberties, and property were most affected by the manner of enforcement.”
Madison wrote in Federalist #39, that, upon ratification of the Constitution, the 13 states did not consent to become mere appendages of the federal government. Rather, they entered the union ”with their sovereignty intact.”
Madison wrote, “An integral component of that ”residuary and inviolable sovereignty is retained by the states in their immunity from private suits. The pre-eminent purpose of state sovereign immunity is to accord states the dignity that is consistent with their status as sovereign entities
In Ware v. Hylton, the Court held, that prior to 1781, the states were independent governments. Dual sovereignty, in the American representative republic, means that the states never relinquished their sovereignty.
Under this dual theory of sovereignty, the federal government holds dual sovereignty with the states, and both governments are subordinate to the sovereignty of “We, the people.”
The Origins of American Democratic Sovereignty
James Wilson, speaking in the Constitutional Convention, said, “My position is that the sovereignty of the nation resides in the people,… the people at large…They can distribute one portion of power to the more contracted circle called the nation.”
When 3 of the Massachusetts delegates to the Convention left Philadelphia, in 1787, they wrote out their objections to the document.
Malachi Maynard, Consider Arms, and Samuel Field, wrote that Madison’s Constitution directly contradicted the natural rights of citizens guaranteed by their state constitution.
“What would keep common citizens from being enslaved by a constitution that rejected the principles of the revolution?” they asked.
The natural rights conservative, Centinel, explained that Madison’s defect concerned the translation of popular sovereignty into law.
Centinel wrote, “Madison’s constitution is silent on how “consent of the citizens” is translated into “self-government. If the people are sovereign how does the opinion of citizens direct the policies of government?”
Centinel agreed with the 3 delegates from Massachusetts that the state constitutions were superior in protecting the natural rights of citizens from an all-powerful central government than Madison’s constitution.
There is nothing in the Federalist constitution, noted Centinel, like the detailed definition of consent in the various state constitutions.
Throughout American history, Madison’s constitution only worked when citizens shared a common moral value that all citizens, rich and poor, were subject to the equal application of the law.
When the citizens shared this moral value, the citizens voluntarily obeyed the American rule of law.
Hobbes explained the shared adherence to the moral values as, “The Law of Nature, which forbids a man to act in any way, which may threaten or violate his own means for self-preservation.”
The same defect in Madison’s constitution of protecting natural rights creates the incipient threat to liberty by the Democrat Party emphasis on social justice.
Meathead’s definition of democracy has no method of translating the consent of the governed into policy because social justice does not rely on voluntary allegiance to the American rule of law.
Socialist Social Justice
Socialists have no mechanism to translate the consent of the governed into policy because they have no concept of citizen sovereignty, and consequently, no allegiance to obey the American rule of law.
The application of social justice fairness policies, for Democrats, comes after the economic transactions occur on the output side of a free market capitalist exchange.
On the input side, prior to the exchange, the left is blind to the concepts of national sovereignty and popular sovereignty because the left has no concept of the nation’s borders, and a disregard for individual citizens to make collective decisions.
In the absence of a definition of national or citizen sovereignty, socialist regimes always end in brutal police repression.
If two parties to an economic exchange freely, and voluntarily, enter the exchange, and the socialist elites then determine that the exchange was unfair, the elites must use the police power of the state to undo the outcome, in order to obtain social justice.
In the hands of a socialist, like Meathead, the police power easily devolves into torture and prison to obtain obedience to the socialist ideology.
The Democrat’s Destruction of the Rule of Law and the Collapse of the American Representative Republic.
Madison’s representative republic was based upon the free market, where all citizens had an equal opportunity for financial prosperity.
In his conversion of the Democratic Party to a global socialist movement, Obama weaponized the intelligence agencies against political opposition.
This was the first stage of eliminating political opposition in order to implement a repressive totalitarian regime.
When there is no longer opposition, socialist movements always lead to an authoritarian ruler, in the name of Lenin, Mao, Fidel, or Obama.
Left-wing legal ideology is based upon the concepts of skin color, gender, and class privilege. The socialists believe that certain types of people who are white, and upper class capitalists, are guilty before the fact.
According to critical legal philosophy, all white people must bear the responsibility for acts of oppression committed by their white ancestors.
The socialist Democrat goal is to use the Federal courts to convert, or “transform” America into a one-world socialist government. Their model of government is European socialism.
For left-wing socialist judges, justice as fairness in legal proceedings is more important than the pursuit of individual liberty or the “equal application of the law.”
Justice, as fairness, is arbitrary and capricious because the judicial decisions are based upon a Federal judge’s social construction of a reality that is rooted in a hatred of America as a racist nation.
Left-wing logic is based upon their social construction of reality. Socialists do not believe in absolute truth. Truth, for Meathead, is relative, and socially-constructed, and is not based upon observable facts.
When Meathead states that, “Reality is reality. Truth is truth,” what he means is the reality that America is a flawed nation, and that the truth is that capitalism is unfair to collective identity groups.
For socialists, the truth content of the dossier depends on whether it is consistent with the Democrat’s socially constructed reality that Trump stole the election from the rightful winner.
To Meathead, Schiff, and Nadler, the dossier is truth because the premises of the dossier confirm their prior conviction of how evil America is.
The truth content of the dossier acts as the logical confirmation of Trump’s guilt.
When Senator Warren calls for Trump’s impeachment, she does not cite a high crime of misdemeanor, she cites Trump’s crime of defeating Hillary.
For Warren and Meathead, the contents of the dossier act as the evidence for the Democrat’s conclusion that Trump is an illegitimate President, and must be removed from office.
In other words, the left’s target is the concept of individual liberty, and in order to destroy liberty, they must first destroy political opposition by getting rid of Trump.
This is my conclusion:
America cannot be, at the same time, a global socialist state, and a free sovereign representative republic. The nation must be one thing, or the other.
Natural rights conservatives find themselves locked into a constitutional contract with left-wing lunatics, like Meathead, who intend to create a globalist socialist state..
The intent of the Democrat socialists is to replace individual liberty, itself, in order to substitute global left-wing totalitarian collectivism.
Treason is the one and only offense defined in Madison’s constitution as an act to overthrow national sovereignty.
Obama, and Mueller committed treason in their attempt to stop the peaceful transition of power.
Obama, Schiff, Nadler and Pelosi are traitors, and Meathead’s convoluted statement about driving a stake through the heart of democracy fits within the socialist strategy of undermining a constitutional republic.
Meathead’s sole stature as a spokesman for the left is based upon his television role of Meathead.
Meathead has never written a scholarly article, never written a book, or contributed any document of intellectual merit on the topic of how a socialist regime would translate the consent of the governed into policy.
Yet, Meathead is a perfect representative of a socialist media acolyte. He is devoid of logic, but cock-sure in his moral certainty that socialism is better than capitalism.
Meathead and Obama have a God-given natural right to create their own new nation and live under the slavery of state socialism.
The only peaceful, non-violent solution to the nation’s conflict is to dissolve the nation into two new nations:
The Socialist States of America
The Democratic Republic of America.
After the creation of the new socialist state, Meathead may be able to get a government acting gig where he can inflict his hatred of non-believers with torture, and the many forms of repression that his vivid imagination can produce.
You can join the political movement to create a natural rights republic and contribute our mission at CLPnewsnetwork.com
You can learn more about the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com
Our political movement is going to raise crowd funding capital to support our organization, and you can make your capital contribution at our website.
I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network
Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com