Belle of Liberty

Letting Freedom Ring

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Violence is Not an Option

At least, it's not a very palatable option.  Reading through the Declaration of Independence, I cannot find much of anything in Thomas Jefferson’s language that relates to violence, other than that “as Free and Independent States, they have full power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do.”

Jefferson does refer to abolishing or altering forms of governments that are destructive of the ends of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness (including ownership of private property). To that end, the Founding Fathers had a realistic expectation that Great Britain would not simply acquiesce but would use force to prevent the rebellion of what it considered its colonies.

“Violence is an option that is on the table,” was a rather unusual stance for Stephen Broader, a Dallas politician and preacher to take. Is he a war-monger, or simply a realistic like the Founding Fathers, who knew their enemy would go “all the way?”

Our enemies are not three thousand miles away, but right next door, down the street, or in the next town. Before the riots of the 1960s, the last time America experienced a sustained conflict on her own shores was during the Civil War. Our commitment to freedom has been compromised. We are a representative government, and with that understanding, American citizens devolve their governmental responsibilities to representatives in the local, state, and federal government.

For generations, Americans have been aware of the corruption inherent in politicians. They’ve taken it as a given, the price they pay for not having a participatory democracy, which would be impossible and impractical. Their only recourse has ever been the voting booth. That is supposed to be the way of a civilized society; the difference between a sentient, educated state and a barbarous dictatorship. That is why you see Greeks rioting in the streets, French youth burning cars nightly, and union workers threatening “scabs” (people who cross a picket line), while decent Americans go home at night to their families. The Tea Parties are the closest Americans have ever come to “taking to the streets”, which they did peaceably.

Supposing we were to start a violent revolution? Supposing the oppression did become too much to bear? Broden is right, that that day may come, especially if medical panels start deciding who will live and who will die, if people are fined or even imprisoned for speaking their minds, and thugs are permitted to beat women and children in the streets.

Supposing the president of the United States, in concert with Congress, abolished the U.S. Constitution and submitted us to the rule of an international government? It’s not that hard to imagine such a world; we’re on its very brink. Violence is usually the illegitimate child of tyranny and corruption. The very first rule of such a government is to outlaw insurrection.

So who should be the first to die? My vote would be for the drug dealers. The death penalty should be instituted for anyone who deals drugs. Law enforcement should have carte blanche in dealing with any armed drug dealers: shoot to kill. Following that, anyone purchasing the stuff should be thrown in jail for a very, very long time with only bologna sandwiches and water to sustain them. No gymnasium equipment, no computers, no cell phones, no television. The biggest mistake we ever made was to decriminalize drugs.

But what do we do with the rest of them? Who should go next? Muslim terrorists? Eco terrorists? Executive criminals guilty of ponzi schemes? Shall we throw foolish college activists into solitary confinement for their stupidity? Lock up all the bureaucrats who’ve chained us to the monster Ted Nugent calls “Fedzilla”? Send all the teachers who’ve taught our kids false environmental science and indoctrinated them into progressive communism to reform school?

Do to them what they’re planning to do to us? In the play “Amadeus”, a frail and elderly Salieri says to the priest, “It’s one thing to consider murder. But it’s another thing to actually do the deed.” And have the blood on your hands.

If we take the attitude that ‘electoral’ failure is not an option, perhaps we won’t have to worry about those messier options.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home