By Douglas V. Gibbs -- Bio and Archives June 2, 2016
“Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”—Benjamin Franklin
“A well-instructed people alone can be permanently a free people.”—James Madison
At a meeting of patriots I attended, where the attendees were the kind of people who desire to either reclaim the republic, or survive the coming collapse if (or maybe we should say “when”) it happens, after I explained the importance of the United States returning to being a godly nation, and educating the country about the original intent of the United States Constitution (after reading the above quotes by Benjamin Franklin and James Madison to the audience) in order for us to have the opportunity to reclaim the republic, a person raised his hand and said (I’m paraphrasing here), “There’s not enough time to educate people. We need to be taking action. We need to be taking back our country. Those who don’t understand what needs to be done are in the way, and we don’t have time to educate them.”
The problem is often we ourselves are not properly educated. If we don’t fully understand how the American System is supposed to function in the first place, and if we just get out there doing what we think we need to do based on our gut feeling, we may do more damage than good. Part of the problem is that Americans are convinced we are a democracy, so they look for democratic solutions. They vote, protest, and poke their representatives in the chest as they spew angry rhetoric - and leave it at that. Even those of us who understand the U.S. is not a democracy default back to that concept without realizing it because we’ve been taught to think that way our entire lives. We have been taught, and convinced, that change comes through the mob-rule mentality of democracy. When we think in a “we are a democracy” kind of manner, we don’t even consider there are solutions to our problem with the federal government that go beyond democracy. We fail to recognize that through the States we can utilize the power of a republic.
The comment by the gentleman who proclaimed there’s “not enough time” takes a position that either we must avoid collapse, or we are screwed forever. Has anyone considered that perhaps there may be life after collapse if it happens? That the generation after the collapse, if armed with the proper knowledge, would be able to pull our struggling country out of the muck? Reality dictates that it may be necessary to collapse, go through a period of bondage. The question, then, would be, “How severe would that collapse be?” “How long would the period of bondage last?” “How bloody must that period of bondage be before Americans finally return to the foundation provided by the Founding Fathers?”
Is it possible that, because of all of the education and preparation we provide right now, Americans could come out the other side reclaiming a viable constitutional republic?
I agree, I would rather avoid any collapse, or a period of extreme difficulties in this country, but the longer we tread on the current path, the more inevitable it is that it will get much worse before it gets any better. Educating Americans is important because if we fully understand the United States Constitution, the solutions to either avoid collapse, or survive collapse, become more clear. We may not need to resort to rash “French Revolution” style decisions, but instead we can follow a path designed by the Founding Fathers.
The people who oppose the original intent of the United States Constitution know that the path to reclaiming the republic runs through the States. This is why for over two hundred years the battle has been over State Sovereignty. Alexander Hamilton’s Federalists sought to compromise the autonomy of the States through economic means by creating a central banking system (Bank of the United States). Chief Justice John Marshall used a 36-year iron fist over the United States Supreme Court to establish judicial supremacy, and to anchor into stone the philosophy of federal supremacy, primarily through nine specific court rulings and opinions (I am writing a book titled “John Marshall and the Nine Judicial Rulings that Changed America” - Stay tuned for when that book is available). Statist forces used the American Civil War to alter our country from a union of States into a centrally controlled nation, changing it from the United States “are” to the United States “is”, while also using the situation to change the Constitution itself by incorporating the Bill of Rights to the States.
The Progressive Era saw the death of the States’ voice in the United States Senate (17th Amendment), the end of State oversight regarding the taxation used to fund the federal government (16th Amendment) and a return to central banking that provides incredible power to international bankers over the U.S. economy (Federal Reserve) - essentially eliminating any State input regarding the U.S. Economy. Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the Great Depression as an excuse to engage in the greatest lurch towards socialism by the United States in the twentieth century. Eisenhower enabled the opportunity for the federal government to extort the States using federal highway funding with the enactment of the federal highway system. John F. Kennedy challenged the Federal Reserve and the “conventional wisdom” of the radical left, and was assassinated as a result. His successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, used government power to increase Roosevelt’s damage, and create The Great Society with the specific goal of enslaving the minority vote (blacks, in particular) by showering them with gifts from the treasury, and in their dependence to the federal government, ensuring that the minority populations become beholden and loyal to the federal government, while turning them against their States. And now, in a final bid to kill State Sovereignty, a major push is in place to end the Electoral College, which may prove to be the final nail in the coffin.
The Electoral College was designed to provide a voice for the minority States, while protecting us from the excesses of democracy. Without the Electoral College, the populations of the seven largest cities in the United States would determine the presidency, and everyone else’s votes would no longer matter. Iowa and New Hampshire would no longer matter out the gate. None of the smaller States would. Then, with State influence completely out of the way, it would simply take 51% of the population to vote away the rights of the other 49%.
The people are falling for these games because we are not properly educated about the United States Constitution, and because our churches have become nothing more than a minor voice hiding inside the four walls of their churches, and the pastors have become silent because they have promised to keep their mouths shut so that they can keep their non-profit status.
For how many pieces of silver are the churches willing to sell out God’s Law?
Many of these churches, and citizens, don’t act because they don’t realize they can. They haven’t been educated. One may say we don’t have the time to educate people, but if you don’t educate the people, the regiment of Constitutional Warriors who are determined to face off with a tyrannical federal government is smaller, less equipped, and is not fully capable of sustaining an extensive battle in the arena of ideas. So, should we go to battle with a small force that knows only a part of the battle plan? Or should we educate, and then go into battle later on with a large force of well-educated warriors fully capable of implementing the battle plan on the battlefield of ideas and political debate - while waving the flag of godliness and a contract called the U.S. Constitution that demands that a virtuous society stands behind it?
Whether we’ve got the time, or not, we have to educate, and we have to implement the battle tactics of a republic - not that of a democracy. Otherwise, the period through which we reside in bondage may be fiercer, and longer in time.
Here’s one more quote that applies: “The good sense of the people will always be found to be the best army. They may be led astray for a moment, but will soon correct themselves.”—Thomas Jefferson
Douglas V. Gibbs of Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary, has been featured on “Hannity” and “Fox and Friends” on Fox News Channel, and other television shows and networks. Doug is a Radio Host on KMET 1490-AM on Saturdays with his Constitution Radio program, as well as a longtime podcaster, conservative political activist, writer and commentator. Doug can be reached at douglasvgibbs [at] yahoo.com or constitutionspeaker [at] yahoo.com.
This full article is copied from the Canadian Free Press and can be read at this link below;
http://canadafreepress.com/article/time-enough-for-collapse
Mr. Gibbs email is available on the CFP page.
Replies
This is an age old discussion; So what IS the difference between a Republic and a Democracy?
And then how do we define what a Constitutional Republic is? A Constitutional FREE Republic?
If we are going to try to educate the rest of the country on what a Republic is, and what freedom really means, perhaps it would be a good idea if we developed a little better understanding ourselves first.
Definition of “Republic”; Merriam-Websters Dictionary;
Simple Definition of republic
: a country that is governed by elected representatives and by an elected leader (such as a president) rather than by a king or queen
Full Definition of republic
1 a (1) : a government having a chief of state who is not a monarch and who in modern times is usually a president (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government b (1) : a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law (2) : a political unit (as a nation) having such a form of government c : a usually specified republican government of a political unit <the French Fourth Republic>
2 : a body of persons freely engaged in a specified activity <the republic of letters>
3 : a constituent political and territorial unit of the former nations of Czechoslovakia, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or Yugoslavia
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/republic
Simple Definition of democracy
: a form of government in which people choose leaders by voting
: a country ruled by democracy
: an organization or situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights
Full Definition of democracy
plural democracies
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
2 : a political unit that has a democratic government
3 capitalized : the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States <from emancipation Republicanism to New Deal Democracy — C. M. Roberts>
4 : the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority
5 : the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy
Magna Carta (Latin for "the Great Charter"), also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Latin for "the Great Charter of the Liberties"), is a charter agreed by King John of England at Runnymede, near Windsor, on 15 June 1215
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Carta
To me it appears that the dictionary is not going to be much help here. Sure it has the definitions of the words and some small examples of the terms, but it seems to come up short at best when we try to define The Constitutional Free Republic of The United States of America. In order to find that definition we need to look back at our own history and how the founding fathers defined it.
We could go back to the papers of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Pane, Ben Franklin, and several others. And we could spend the rest of the year writing and copying archives and making comments on it all. (Probably not a bad thing to do but very time consuming to say the least).
When Ben Franklin replied “You have a Republic Madam – If You can Keep It”. He was talking about and referring to precisely where WE are today.
America is a Constitutional Free Republic, IF (and how) we can keep it.
We're dealing with at least one full generation of people here that think the definition of freedom is being able to choose between McDonalds and Burger King. They have no concept of what freedom really means.
Unfortunately I think one of the reasons OAS failed was because we failed to present a clear enough picture of what we intended to restore once we returned our Government back to a Constitutional Republic. (I'll take the blame and responsibility for that failure).
The failure was in not completely understanding just how far Americans have been “dumbed-down” even to the point that they have no understanding at all about what freedom or “Republic” even means. Much less about what we intended to “restore”.
Perhaps in any attempts to define a Constitutional Republic versus a Democracy, particularly in today's society, we should also include the definitions of Communism and an oligarchy.
Oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία (oligarkhía); from ὀλίγος (olígos), meaning "few", and ἄρχω (arkho), meaning "to rule or to command")[1][2][3] is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small number of people. These people might be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, education, corporate, religious or military control. Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who typically pass their influence from one generation to the next, but inheritance is not a necessary condition for the application of this term.
Throughout history, oligarchies have often been tyrannical, relying on public obedience or oppression to exist. Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich,[4] for which another term commonly used today is plutocracy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
Simple Definition of communism
: a way of organizing a society in which the government owns the things that are used to make and transport products (such as land, oil, factories, ships, etc.) and there is no privately owned property
Full Definition of communism
1 a : a theory advocating elimination of private property b : a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed
2 capitalized a : a doctrine based on revolutionary Marxian socialism and Marxism-Leninism that was the official ideology of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics b : a totalitarian system of government in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of production c : a final stage of society in Marxist theory in which the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed equitably d : communist systems collectively
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/communism
The Founding Fathers of America were all well aware of most of these types of Government, (Communism was not invented or defined until the late 1800's by Karl Marx). But the Founders were very well educated. They were among the very few upper-class wealthy and with a lot of influence in early American society. When they escaped Europe and came here to this new land they were seeking freedom. Freedom from an over oppressive Oligarchy run by the King of England, and also from the early tyrannical church rulers, (the Pope). They were also very aware of what and why the Crusades were all about in the 1600's and about the brutality of the Islamic religion.
So their definitions and understanding of what American should be and how our form of a Republic should be structured was completely different from anything in any known written history. They knew that any form of Government would always have the potential to be over run and taken over by over zealous egotistical maniacs.
How did Russia and China both come to be known as a “Republic”? (The Soviet Socialists Republic of Russia), and “The Peoples Republic of China”)? How can they each be called a “Republic” when they are both known to be Communist controlled societies? That's actually pretty interesting and very simple. When Mao took over China, and again when Stalin took over Russia, they each (individually) decided to adopt the American Constitution in order to form their respective new Governments. The difference between what they created to rule their respective Governments and our American form of Government is the Bill of Rights. Each of these other countries adopted our Constitution but they stripped away all of the people's guarantees of freedom and liberty by stripping away the Bill of Rights.
Why do you think the Obama democrats are so intent on eliminating our Second amendment and limiting our freedom of speech, (1st Amendment). Once they succeed in eliminating the first two amendments the rest will be easy to eliminate. And America will become another Communist nation ruled by tyrants.