Episode 46. April 10, 2020.
CLP topic category: Irreconcilable Differences.
Crossing the American Rubicon to Divorce the Democrat Socialists.
Our podcast today is titled, Crossing the American Rubicon to Divorce the Democrat Socialists. This podcast audio and text is just the introduction to a much longer article, available at clpnewsnetwork.com.
The other sections of the longer article are:
Section 1. Irreconcilable Differences With The Democrat Socialists
Section 2. What Comes After the Collapse of Madison’s Representative Republic?
Section 3. Crossing the American Rubicon Restore the Natural Rights Republic.
The full audio and text of this podcast is available for free, for one week. The entire historical archive of all CLP podcasts is available for an annual subscription of $30.
Introduction. The End of Madison’s Representative Republic.
Our podcast extends the recent comment by Jesse Kelly, Host of ‘I’m Right’ on the television channel, The First.
Kelly tweets,
“We need a national divorce. I have no common bond with these people. There is nothing keeping us together. Let’s get through this pandemic and start working out the details.”
We argue that the current ideological differences between Democrat socialists and natural rights conservatives are irreconcilable and irresolvable.
We cite the historical case of the Roman Republic that collapsed when citizens lost trust and allegiance to the Roman rule of law.
We argue that the ideological differences involve fundamental disagreements over the mission of the nation, and we use the original principles of the nation to argue that a representative republic can only endure if it is built upon shared cultural values that bind the citizens into a common mission.
We use the analogy of a failed marriage to argue that there is no longer any love between socialists and conservatives, and that the best course of action is to admit that Madison’s representative republic is over.
Coming to grips with the fact that the national marriage is over means crossing the American Rubicon, to create a new constitution for a new nation, built upon the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation.
And, like the end of a marriage, crossing the divorce Rubicon means bidding our former spouse good luck, goodbye, and God speed.
The Roman Republic was based upon allegiance of citizens to obey the unwritten rule of law. The allegiance to the rule of law was voluntary. The allegiance was sustained because Roman citizens shared a widespread cultural value of personal honor that compelled voluntary allegiance to obey the rule of law.
The fall of the Roman Republic was caused by a widespread moral decay of the traditional Roman social and moral codes of behavior, both in the elites and the common citizens.
The traditional values that Roman citizens shared were virtue, individual dignity, self-discipline, and sense of duty.
Cicero explained the fall of the Roman Republic as the collapse of morality by saying,
“Everybody demands as much political power as he has force behind him. Reason, moderation, law, tradition, and duty count for nothing.”
In other words, the Roman Republic was based upon respect for the unwritten rule of law that compelled voluntary obedience to the written law. When the respect for the unwritten rule of law eroded, the Roman Republic ended.
When Caesar reached the Rubicon, from his conquest of Gaul, he was aware that respect for rule of law was ending because he had become a victim of the corruption of the Roman Senate.
Before he crossed the Rubicon, he invited a number of Roman historians and philosophers to come to the river and describe the situation in Rome.
They described the rampant corruption of the Senators, who were using the government to enrich themselves.
After his discussions with the historians, he reached his own psychological Rubicon that the Roman Republic was over. Part of his motivation to cross the Rubicon was to end the corrupt Roman Republic.
In crossing the Rubicon, Caesar precipitated a 6 year civil war with Pompey, the leader of the corrupt regime in the Roman Senate.
Like Caesar, American natural rights conservatives must cross their own psychological Rubicon that the national marriage with Democrat socialists is over.
The conservative’s ideological divisions with socialists are irrevocable and irreconcilable.
Like the Roman Senate, the national government has been captured by a centralized, global, elite tyranny that uses the agencies of government to enrich themselves.
Like the Roman Senators, the corporate and socialist ruling class elites in Washington have a profound disrespect for the rule of law, and a profound hatred of non-socialists.
Madison’s Constitution is no help to citizens in eliminating the tyranny, because Madison’s institutional rules of the Constitution did not contemplate a disunion between citizens in the principles and mission of the nation.
Madison’s rules were designed to check and balance commercial financial social classes, not ideological differences over freedom and liberty.
The ideology of socialism does not fit into Madison’s Constitution because it is a unified philosophical view of the world. As the socialists use the term in their propaganda, the ideology is aimed at achieving a future state of “social justice,” not protecting and preserving liberty, today.
Attempting to “fix” Madison’s Constitution with amendments does nothing to change the behavior of Democrats, or restore their respect for the rule of law.
Polybius wrote,
“Once people had grown accustomed to eating off others’ tables and expected their daily needs to be met, then, they found someone to champion their cause… they instituted government by force.”
The socialists, as predicted by Polybius, expect the government to meet their daily needs, and they are committed to taking over the government by force to eradicate a society based upon individualism.
The Democrat socialists masquerade as American citizens because they need the basic liberties of the nation, in order to destroy the liberty of the conservatives.
Natural rights conservatives must adjust their mental image of Democrats in order to accommodate the new, changed political reality that Democrats hate America, hate conservatives, and are dedicated to taking away fundamental civil liberties.
Conservatives must bring themselves to the conclusion that there are only two options open for dealing with the socialists.
Either the nation can embark on a civil dissolution, where both factions form their own nation, or the citizens can embark on a civil war, where the victor imposes order on the losers.
I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this is the copyrighted Citizen Liberty Party News Network podcast for April 10, 2020.
Section 1. Irreconcilable Differences With The Democrat Socialists
On every single principle of a natural rights republic, the Democrats socialists have an alien, subversive, view of America. Their ideology is like a religion and that religion justifies open, total jihad with their enemies.
These differences are not merely partisan policy disputes about which political interest group wins the spoils of political victory. It is a war.
A twitter user summed up the extent of the division,
“American Past-time.We ARE in a war, but not with the virus. The leftists, globalists, and media are actively rooting for more death, medicines to fail, and economic collapse. That is a war on the American people and we are on the other side with alternative media like TGP and of course, President Trump.”
Every crisis is seen by the Democrats as an opportunity to advance the socialist agenda.
Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Gavin Newsome, and James Clyburn have all stated that the Wu Flu offers an opportunity to remake America, into a socialist nation.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested in her April 2, 2020, news conference, that she intends to form a new inquisition to disrupt President Trump.
According to Buck Sexton, “Pelosi is not going to let a global pandemic stop her in her quest to “destroy” the Trump presidency.”
Sexton continued,
“She’s not putting aside her jihad against Trump. She’s not going to stop. She wants to destroy him. She is viewing this as an opportunity for the Democratic Party to end the Trump presidency.”
Ending the Trump presidency is not the end goal for the socialists. Trump, in their minds, must be removed, in order for the socialists to make progress on their social justice agenda.
The essence of their agenda is that America is a racist unfair nation, and that their vision of socialism would be fair.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated that the impact of the Wu Flu is disproportionate on blacks and disadvantaged identity groups.
She stated,
“COVID deaths are disproportionately spiking in Black and Brown communities, Why? Because the chronic toll of redlining, environmental racism, wealth gap, etc. ARE underlying health conditions.”
The use of racism, as a weapon, by AOC, is simply a way to excite the sense of grievance and victimization of black people.
The bigger goal for the Democrats is a global socialist one-world government, where a tiny set of socialist elites make all the decisions.
In his recent interview about Wu Flu, Bill Gates, whose foundation funded the IHME model, used the royal, collectivist “we” to explain how he sees the virus as an opportunity.
Gates states,
“We don’t want to have a lot of recovered people…To be clear, we’re trying – through the shut-down in the United States – to not get to one percent of the population infected. We’re well below that today, but with exponentiation, you could get past that three million [people or approximately one percent of the U.S. population being infected with COVID-19 and the vast majority recovering]. I believe we will be able to avoid that with having this economic pain.”
Jonathan Turley, a media guest, explained that the socialists believe that Trump is insane and must be removed from office. He cites Jake Tapper, a media propagandist who is using his media platform to allege that Trump must be removed.
Turley states,
“Tapper’s retweeting that “Trump is 100% insane” only further undermines the media by reaffirming for many that the media is campaigning against Trump rather than covering him. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”
To which David Horowitz provides the reply that summarizes the irreconcilable differences between natural rights conservatives and socialists.
He states,
“Unfortunately Tapper and his friends hate Trump more than they love their country.”
To be more accurate, Horowitz could have added that they love the pursuit of socialism above all other values, and that their hatred of Trump is due to his national sovereignty MAGA doctrine.
In hs article, “The End of America?” Philip Carl Salzman summarizes the 6 philosophical conflicts that explain the irreconcilable differences.
He begins with the observation that the socialists hate Madison’s Constitution.
“Progressives today reject the American Constitution on the grounds that its authors were slave owners, and slavery thus becomes the tool to discredit everything about America.”
He then lists the grounds for divorce:
First, national sovereignty is rejected in favor of international ties and supranational organizations.
Second, American citizenship is rejected as an unearned privilege, to be corrected by open borders and floods of illegal immigrants, spun as “undocumented.”
Third, individuals no longer count as constituents of society. What is important to the socialist vision is statistical “representation” of different categories based on percentage in the general population.
Fourth, capitalism is of course rejected because it is a cause of inequality.
Fifth, equality of opportunity and economic freedom are rejected by progressive advocates of “social justice” in favor of equality of results, that is, absolute equality, which requires government control of the economy.
Sixth, the highest progressive value is killing babies in the womb, up to a million a year, ten million in a decade. The American family, as a cohesive social factor, is rejected because families are regarded as the source of oppression for females.
As noted by twitter user, Eric the Red, there are only two options for conservatives, civil dissolution or civil war.
He states,
“The left are forcing a final showdown with their enemies, i.e., all the rest of us. They’ve always wanted a civil war, because they think they will ultimately win it…This is the trigger point. Every single one of us must come to his senses, must finally wake up, must fully realize what is happening, must come together and be prepared to give our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor to oppose the evil forces who are seizing their moment to permanently enslave us.”
To return to Jesse Kelly, exactly what do the details of the national divorce look like and how do natural rights conservatives start to work out the details?
What Comes After the Collapse of Madison’s Representative Republic?
The divorce, today, in America, looks similar to the divorce of the patriots from the King of England.
The patriots had a much better idea to avoid a centralized tyranny by decentralizing political authority to the states.
The end goal of the 1781 Articles of Confederation, the new nation’s first constitution, in this application of rational self-interest, was to protect individual freedom.
When Madison met in Philadelphia, with his 37 self-selected aristocrats to overturn the Articles, natural rights patriots, aka anti-federalists, objected to five parts of Madison’s rules of procedure:
- the Necessary and Proper Clause,
- the Interstate Commerce Clause,
- the lack of term limits for Congress,
- the lack of accountability for the Federal judiciary,
- the convoluted rules for amending the constitution,
They also objected to Madison’s secret, hidden agenda of embedding the power of the slaveocracy into the fabric of the new Constitution.
To answer Jesse Kelly, these are the same details today that need to be worked out for the new nation.
The map of the results of the 2016 election describe where the state legislatures are most likely to support a new constitution, that changes Madison’s centralized representative republic into a decentralized democratic republic.
Credit.Politico
Article I, Section 10 of the United States Constitution provides that “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress… enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State.”
The legislatures in each state would vote to join a compact, similar in concept to the Democrat socialist idea of combining electoral votes in each state.
After the compact was formed, the legislature would give citizens the choice to vote on 3 options:
- Allow the citizens of a state to vote to maintain its membership in the current U. S. constitutional framework, to be called the Former United States.
- Allow the citizens to vote to join the Socialist States of America, in confederation with California.
- Allow the citizens to join the The Democratic Republic of America, the new natural rights republic.
Crossing the American Rubicon Restore the Natural Rights Republic.
When 3 of the Massachusetts delegates to the 1787 Convention left Philadelphia, in disgust, they returned to their state to write out their objections to Madison’s 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.
They explained that while Madison’s constitution guaranteed a republican form of government, it was a slavery-based representative republic.
The slaveocracy obtained 60% more representation in the House of Representatives than northern states, and the slave owners obtained constitutional protection in their property by forcing other states to return their runaway slaves.
The slaveocracy’s numerical power in the House of Representatives, plus rules on import and export taxes on the products made by slaves, gave the southern states control over taxation and the nation’s economic policies.
Madison wove slavery into the fabric of government, and his rules could easily be transfigured to incorporate a new form of socialist slavery today. Rather than being owned by a plantation elite, under Democrat socialism, common citizens would be owned by the government.
The natural rights conservatives are in the same position, today, as the colonists in 1765.
They are, as Franklin noted, “subjects of subjects.”
As correctly analyzed, in 1764, by Rhode Island Governor Stephen Hopkins, the colonists, as subjects of the Crown, were just like slaves.
Hopkins wrote, “Britain’s glorious constitution guaranteed that no one ever be deprived of his property without his consent. On the contrary those who are governed by the will of another or of others, and whose property may be taken from them by taxes, or otherwise without their consent and against their will are in the same miserable condition of slaves.”
As explained by Thomas Paine, the new American government must be built on the truth, moral truth, not on power relationships that existed in the mixed British class system that Madison created in 1787.
For Paine, as for Jefferson, the truth was that God had granted citizens certain inalienable rights, commonly called “natural rights.”
The new government, said Paine, “is derived solely from a sovereign people…mutually and reciprocally maintained principles of nature in society.”
There are three components to the argument that justifies conservatives crossing the Rubicon to divorce the socialists:
- The socialists do not share cultural values with conservatives and seek to impose their totalitarian ideology on 63 million Trump voters.
- Madison’s Constitution is perfectly suited to imposing the slavery of socialism, based upon Madison’s principles of social class elitism.
- The only non-violent solution is to allow the socialists to form their own nation, so that natural rights conservatives can divorce them and restore the natural rights republic.
In crossing the Rubicon to create the natural rights conservatives must embed the principles in the Declaration of Independence that the “consent of the governed” is the glue that binds citizens together to obey the constitutional rules that they give to themselves.
Our constitutional principles of government are on our Democratic Republic of America website.
You can follow our daily commentary on twitter, at @ltvtoo.
I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.
You can subscribe to all of the audio and text of our podcasts, for $30 per year, at our website.
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 federalist, state sovereignty framework of the new constitution of the Democratic Republic of America at GABBYpress.com
Thank you for joining me today and please visit our entire archive of podcasts at clpnewsnetwork.com