88 Comments
20hEdited

When the current constitution was being ratified, 3 States explicitly reserved the right to secede. Later, Texas reserved the right to secede when joining the Union, I think. Alexander Hamilton supposedly told the convention in New York that the people of New York State were the sovereign of it. Threats to secede occurred multiple times, and at least one time from a Northern State.

In short, in the beginning, the States assumed that they had the right to secede from the Union and that therefore the word "delegated" in the 10th amendment was not assumed to mean "surrendered." So the original Union, understood in its original historical context, was a unique government that delegated CERTAIN powers (CONDITIONALLY) to a common, federal government. They did not assume they surrendered their sovereignty. So each State was, for all practical purposes, a nation.

Expand full comment

I believe there was a secession movement in New England to protest the War of 1812.

Expand full comment

Yeah, that's the one I'm thinking of. As Jefferson and Madison said, tyranny comes after a long "train" of usurpations.

Expand full comment

So..the Republican Party pushed through a bill which gave corporations the same rights as individuals in the USA! Were they brain dead that this was not going to energize fascism? Money has been talking for a long time in DC and the numbers now being expressed demonstrate the corporations now rule and supersede citizens rights! I wrote my Congressman today. They are tone deaf, but I did it anyway: Here is what I said:

Dear Senator Durbin. I am deeply disappointed that you and Senator Duckworth don't understand the great harm that the current medical system is bestowing on your constituents. It is driven by Big Chemo, Big Agra and Big Pharma lobbying that creates "Regulatory Capture". If you don't understand what that means, read the book!

This is my view on your legacy in Congress:

"My Senator from Illinois, Congressman Richard Durbin has clearly stated that RFK Jr. is NOT qualified to run HHS! Why? Because he is an environmental lawyer and has no formal medical training. I guess Senator Durbin who is pro Big Medicine and believes the status quo at NIH is fine would rather have Alex Azar, a lawyer, lobbyist and Lilly Executive return to head HHS since he had the distinction of guiding the Covid con into fruition. I guess Dick Durbin doesn't believe in Regulatory Capture that is pervasive throughout our federal government for the benefit of special interests to maximize their profitability. The negative spin and disinformation will intensify between now and January 20th to discredit those in the new Trump administration that have put in place to reverse the great harm bestowed on the American public. The majority of our Congressman, left and right in DC stay silent on the Covid con that has created great physical and economic harm to Americans. They know who butters their bread.

PS: I am just now learning the great harm the RNA injections have done to my son! I am also just now learning that you are endorsing a uniparty from the left by championing for the removal of the electoral college. Our founders were a lot brighter than what I am seeing today in DC!"

Expand full comment

In no way do I endorse a uniparty. Please. Don't put words or concepts into my mouth.

Expand full comment

I an sorry if you interpreted what I said to Senator Durbin as being directed at your viewpoint. Why did co pilot respond to my comment? Anyone know what is transpiring?

Expand full comment

In fairness to the good Doc, it also seemed to me that you were addressing him.

Expand full comment

The PS: was addressed to Durbin!

Expand full comment

I understood that you were addressing Dick Durban. Maybe you should do an edit of your post to put the whole letter surrounded by quote marks, to stop confusion. It is a good letter

Expand full comment

Single party rule inherently implies totalitarianism such as that of the CCP in the PRC. Absent the progress that debate between opposing viewpoints generates, I do not fully understand how the CCP prevents intellectual stagnation. I suspect innovative concepts and technology are stolen from others and reverse engineered/developed within their capitalist surrogate.

Expand full comment

Watch for the ending quotation mark. It was the end of the letter written by TAB.

Expand full comment

After I took a second look, I understood that you were writing to the Senator,(so I don't see any foul here) but it seems these days we are all hyper- sensitive, and since Dr Malone has been attacked relentlessly, I can well understand the reaction.

Expand full comment

Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): This landmark Supreme Court case, decided by a 5-4 conservative majority, ruled that corporations and unions have a First Amendment right to free speech, including spending money on political campaigns. While this decision expanded corporate rights, it did not "give" corporations rights. They had already been recognized as having certain constitutional protections that were established in a prior precedent.

Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co. (1886): This case is often cited as the origin of the idea that corporations have some of the same rights as individuals under the 14th Amendment. However, the decision itself does not explicitly state this; it was a headnote by the court reporter that indicated the principle.

Expand full comment

Speaking of "unqualified", Dickhead Durbin has never produced anything of value in his entire "adult" life; and exactly like so many in Congress has 'somehow' gotten rich while he continues to suck off the public tit. Durbin personifies the word PARASITE.

Expand full comment

In addition, that Dickhead Durbin ( just like Hillary Clinton), wants to eliminate the Electoral College - which IF that were to actually happen would de facto make the U.S. Constitution null and void.

Expand full comment

While there is much here that makes sense, this assertion is simply false: "the Republican Party pushed through a bill which gave corporations the same rights as individuals in the USA".

Expand full comment

Yea! That's why they can give billions to the political party of their choice. Happened about 2014. I'll try to dig up the specifics to clarify!

Expand full comment

It does not require very close reading of our Constitution or the Federalist Papers to see that the Founders were loath to cede the sovereignty of the individual states to a central power. It also does not take much imagination to assume they would then,and now, be adamantly opposed to ceding the sovereignty of our Republic to any global coalition.

Expand full comment

If the Democrats can push through legislation that eliminates the electoral college, then we have a government controlled by the left. I admire the signers of the Constitution more each day for their brilliance!

Expand full comment

In America, the so-called "Left" meaning "progressives" ( and "liberals") are Americans that promote "equality" via socialism and communism - the end games of BOTH are absolute STATE ownership and control of the "means of production" as Karl Marx named it. Further, the "means of production" on a GLOBAL scale includes ALL land; (including the oceans and water itself ); LABOR (humanity) and MONEY in whatever form be it precious metals, paper money or DIGITAL "currency."

Expand full comment

No legislation can eliminate the electoral college. The Electoral College is established in Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution and further clarified by the 12th Amendment. To eliminate or significantly alter it, the Constitution itself would need to be amended.

An amendment can be proposed by a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, or by a constitutional convention called by two-thirds of state legislatures. Three-fourths (38 out of 50) of state legislatures or state conventions must ratify the amendment. This high bar ensures that significant changes to the structure of government, like eliminating the Electoral College, require broad and overwhelming support across the nation.

Congress can pass laws regarding how elections are conducted, such as setting election dates or enforcing voting rights, but cannot dismantle the Electoral College outright.

National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC). This agreement among states pledges their electors to the winner of the national popular vote once states with a combined total of 270 electoral votes join. This does not abolish the Electoral College but could effectively nullify its traditional role. It operates without a constitutional amendment, relying on states' rights to determine how their electors are appointed.

A personal observation: If the Blue State workaround scheme NPVIC were to garner enough members to defeat the provisions laid out in Article II, Section 1, establishing the Electoral College, a legal challenge would certainly be raised and it seems more than likely the Supreme Court would overrule the NPVIC as Unconstitutional.

In case y'all haven't figured this out, the national populist oligarchs are promoting reverse psychology on social media platforms to encourage the citizenry to investigate civics education and thus become better informed voters.

Expand full comment

Agree. If that happens we have anarchy.

Expand full comment

Pure Libertarianism is anarchy and libertarianism falls on the far right of the political spectrum. The political left, at present, appears to seek the global fascism mentioned in this article as the merging of The United Nations (International Socialism) and The World Economic Forum (International Corporatism). This would result in a surveillance state forced homogenization of culture in an Orwellian setting, much like the PRC. One key difference includes the preservation of democratic institutions to give the appearance of normality on the surface while totalitarian dictates rule from beneath. We already have this paradigm nearly fully formed in the United States and I hope the new administration can dismantle it.

Expand full comment

We have anarchy, right now, in virtually every blue city. They are not run by libertarians.

Expand full comment

There’s a distinction between an engineered civil disobedience and anarchy. In the case of blue cities, conditions or events are intentionally manipulated or exacerbated to create instability, division, or confusion. This ensures the identity politics the democrats rely on remain relevant enough to garner votes.

Expand full comment

One opinion. Mine is that anarchy in blue cities consequence of blatant incompetence.

Expand full comment

Nationalism: I relate to this term; born in the thirties and growing up in the forties. We used to learn and sing patriotic songs, such as, America the Beautiful, Battle Hymn of the Republic, The Star Spangled Banner, and This is my country., etc. We were happy and proud to be Americans. It is sad that commercial interests have totally changed the focus of America from love of country to love of money.

Expand full comment

I, too, belong to that era, but even then, Barbara, "AMERICAN" Socialists and Communists that immigrated into the USA from primarily GERMANY - and Italy, were already spreading the poison of communism into the American body politic; along with Leftist so-called "intellectuals" who infiltrated the American academy top to bottom; and Western culture.

It indeed IS peculiar that so many American millionaires and billionaires side with or have accepted the global quest of the "International Socialists" to consolidate One-World Transnational "governance" - and perpetual rule by the Mother of ALL "Administrative States" by UN-ELECTED BUREAUCRATS to redistribute the 'collective' wealth of planet earth ALWAYS in the name of the "common good."

Question is HOW to do that? Very simply (for the masses) RATIONING of EVERYTHING for "sustainability" - but NOT for the "elite."

Expand full comment

Sad, but true what you wrote. There are many in the world who live with no regard for others; only for their own desires and needs. Alfred Lord Tennyson's quote is one of my favorites. "When shall all men's good, be each man's rule and universal peace lie like a shaft of light across the land."

Expand full comment

The United States government is based on a Constitution that creates a careful balance of power based on a fundamental fear and distrust of government. It recognizes that our rights do not come from government and that no power not spelled out as explicitly granted to the national government is reserved to the states and the people. Every time we deviate from those principles, we court trouble. The Constitution, for example, mandates that wars be declared by Congress. Not by Presidential diktat. And we have a Supreme Court to enforce that, not be a bunch of cowards who ducked the question during the Vietnam War. It is only by getting back to the intentions of the Framers that we will regain our liberty and moral standing. Those who claim that the Constitution is a "living document" to be interpreted at the whim and caprices of the governing class are peddling poisonous snake oil.

Expand full comment

We patriots must stick together. Misunderstanding, anger and resentment will divide us. Thanks to all those who courageously stand by and clarify their message as as they feel necessary. Clarification and commitment to our values is paramount for the survival of our community..

Expand full comment

The founders cautioned against foreign entanglements as being dangerous to the stability and longevity of the Union. We've done the literal opposite since WWII and these entanglements must also be disengaged if our nation is to survive and prosper.

Expand full comment

I would probably think of myself as a nationalist. As Michael Savage says without borders language and culture our country will dissolve slowly or as we have witnessed over the last four years what can happen very quickly. It seems every “nation” at one time in its history was dominated by someone or something else. I mentioned in a post the other day about America returning to its once great status which it, and we deserve, and I forget who brought up Pine Ridge which many know as Wounded Knee. A horrible stain on America and the army where 300 or so men women and children were massacred. Every country on this planet has been formed by war, brutality and or struggles between peoples, without these conflicts there would be no nations, no borders no culture. Isn’t this what we see in this push back towards nationalism throughout the world. Why don’t more people in America that feel so strongly about how this country was formed give their property back. What is the name for people besides liberal, leftist, socialist, more a general term, for people that hate their country and hate its founding? How would they ever survive? I’m not trying to be cynical, I was not alive in 1890, in fact my relatives, at least the history I know of my family wasn’t here yet. What is the term for people that hate their country ?

Expand full comment

I did a quick search for a term defining a person that hates their country and its founding and this is what came up; nationalist-hating, anti-patriot, radical dissident, or traitor.

Expand full comment

James, a strong argument can be made that it all starts with EDUCATION - or more explicitly - MIS education by both public and private schools to dumb-down and indoctrinate - particularly the WIDE-OPEN minds of young children with written, spoken and visual "ed" by Leftist (read COMMUNIST) "teachers" who themselves are NOT "critical thinkers" but have themselves been brainwashed by the Marxist siren song of absolute equality for all.

Expand full comment

I think a distinction should be made between rampant Nationalism and moderate Nationalism, just as a distinction is made between rampant or crony Capitalism and so called free market capitalism. There are further divisions, but I shall keep it simple. Because we have denigrated our own history and culture, and opened our borders to all and sundry, we now have Fundamentalist Islam taking hold of our children, we also have Islamists in government, (and setting up shop in Dearborn Michigan) and anyone who points out that Fundamentalist Islamic law (Sharia) is a religious and political system, that is incompatible with our own constitution, is labeled racist or "Islamaphobic" This would never have happened had we had a more healthy relationship and pride in our own heritage, regardless of our past sins. I believe humans of all colors and creeds are capable of horrors, once having gained power over others. I once read the memoirs of a Conquistador, a fascinating read. In the early days of the Spanish conquest the Aztecs had been lording it over a certain smaller and adjacent tribe, they would not let these less powerful people have access to salt. So the less powerful people complained to the Conquistadors, “We have not savor for our food, please help us." and so the Conquistadors did. Humans like to beat up on humans, animals, plants and anyone and anything they deem as lesser, so if you don’t protect and respect the good things about your own culture, other cultures will move in and take over, and tribalism instead of assimilation will be the law of the day. The article below is an interesting read, of course one can blame “White Supremacy” for all the woes in the world, but that is in many ways a shortcut to thinking.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/07/25/when-tribal-nations-expel-their-black-members-caleb-gayle-we-refuse-to-forget-alaina-e-roberts-ive-been-here-all-the-while

Expand full comment

Factually, Andrea, there is NO human species of 'skin color' that has not engaged in human bondage aka slavery. None: zero, zip, nada. Blacks in the Sudan of Africa still buy and sell black slaves. NO outcry by the UN or "human rights" NGO's.

That includes Native American Indians.

Expand full comment

Indeed. I once read a progressive article about the history of slavery among Black Africans, and I kid you not, it said that the Black slave trade was not as heinous as the White slave trade because they endeavored to sell the slaves to decent people. It also said the Middle Eastern slave traders were not as bad, but I cannot now recall why.

Expand full comment

I identify as a Texan.

Expand full comment

I wish I could say that!!

Expand full comment

I grant you honorary status as one. And proud to do so

Expand full comment

Thank You!!

Expand full comment

My dear departed mother was born in Borger, TX - up in the panhandle. She recalled her folks were sharecroppers - and their rented home had dirt floors. White privilege!

Expand full comment

So did my wifes mom in Alabama.

Expand full comment
20hEdited

My favorite take-aways are "circling the drain" and O'Biden.

There is much to be said about the early Native American contribution, but very little is referenced. The Iroquois Nation, originally consisting of five nations and then the Tuskarora joined in 1722. To me, this is an important piece of American history. Why it isn't included in some discussion on the influence of our politics is a mystery to me. (Look to what the meaning is of "bury the hatchet")

Expand full comment

Depends on where the hatchet is buried .

Expand full comment

Never forget that the late Henry Kissinger was a dedicated One-World-Order Globalist and COUNCIL on FOREIGN RELATIONS member as is - David G. Victor.

Expand full comment
13hEdited

You mean like when word got out, he died, people cheered in unison?

Expand full comment

No idea, T.

Expand full comment

Thank you for the work that you put in to develop this Substack. It was particularly informative.

Expand full comment

I sheepishly admit an entirely too long ignorance of the anacronym MAGA. Without knowing it's meaning I discounted it to the Hatfield's and the McCoy's spewing at each other. My first exposure was through MSM and our President casting it as disgusting. I then only knew MAGA to be considered something comparable to a cancer, but shamefully did not the meaning of the letters. When I learned it what stood for it was a slap of consciousness in the face. The evil cast Make America Great Again was and is anything but as it was advertised. It was yet another class in you cannot believe MSM. I am proud to be a piece of our current President's garbage that wants to make America great again.

Expand full comment

Our language has been systematically made poorer an d less precise because of public education, adoption of minority street argot, and general misuse of words to create false narratives that can be controlled by the user. Sloppy language is a sign of sloppy thinking and the reduction of words in use means reduction of the ability to communicate ideas, opinions and thoughts. Cases in point: general use of "palestinian". There is no such thing as a palestinian because there is no such thing as palestine - old Roman nomenclature. "Assault rifle". Typically and wrongfully applied to any military looking rifle. If it don't fire on full auto it ain't an assault rifle. And, unless it is being used in an assault it has been continuously misapplied to create fear and anxiety favorable to gun banners. "Tax cuts" when they really are TAX RATE CUTS and they BTW, raise more revenue every time they are enacted. Eventually, when the language is cut down and misused we WILL have IDIOCRACY. As children are being brain washed to only value their own "feelings" about everything, that is exactly how they think and act all the while being fatally incorrect about everything.

Well done in today's clarifications.

Expand full comment

Understand typesetters are also share some of the guilt by shortening every word every way they can to save space. My personal complaint is,what nearly everyone does to the plural of Latin derived words. But agree, the less literate the population the easier it is for progressives to make words mean what they want them to mean du jure

Expand full comment

Well said, Henry!

We were VERY close to having both a MOBOCRACY (and) IDIOCRACY running the USA.

Make that the USSA!

Expand full comment

The banning of books like Shakespeare, Russian novels, and others, and replace them with woke garbage, sex acts to our children to see and read in the classroom was a real crime. The changing of words to be allowed to say and other erased (woman), and made up words to fit stupid rules was a real red flag. We saw houses, property, banks, etc., being sucked up by black Rock and other large corporations. Thank God Trump and his group won. We were sliding into hell. I don't think I could ever forgive what left ,woke people have put us through.

Expand full comment

As our world continues to turn, valuable concepts to consider. Thank you.

Global Governance

If this would be the best of all possible worlds with competant and moral leadership ???

I start with an ET review of COP29 and the Baku Agreement. Of particular interest to me was its inclusion of censorship innitiatives.

I move on to an article asserting Trump is throwing out the "experts" in favor of leaderships fostered from experience.

Personally, I conclude that a substantial portion of todays "Global Experts" performances have been leading to harmful results. With a global governance an ability to intervene and stop, so as to redirect - achieve realistic and productive directions, is for all practical purposes annihilated. The great Green scam with its many tentacles is a prime example.

Certainly, our Nation has seriously deteriorated under the impact of Global and National, all too frequent, expert failures and perversions. One should note there are contributions to failures attendant nefarious goals. We have a lot of fixing that's badly needed.

Bottom line, though more could be said, I'm strongly in favor of the Westphalian” structure of autonomous nation-states that share a common commitment of sovereignty and autonomy. That agree to participate in voluntary global relations.

I'm in hopes our new administration, in cooperation with Argentina and like-minded nations, will be able further such goals.

Expand full comment

Global governance, as a centralization of all political power, is an organizational structure that is contrary to the notion of stability and longevity and is precisely what causes empires to crumble. Think Ancient Rome, or even Star Wars.

Westphalian structure requires not entering into cooperative agreements with other nations. The premise is national sovereignty which requires independence absent foreign commitments that could potentially derail our stability.

Expand full comment

I take exception to the Cato Institute's definition of nationalism, denigrating the role of individualism, because this is the essence of true freedom. But "freedom" must be rightly defined and understood. True freedom cannot exist without the acknowledgment of the existence of God. Freedom implies boundaries that are of an eternal origin. Right and wrong are not human constructs; they have their origin in the nature of the Creator. Individualism and freedom go together, and are not missing in the concept of nationalism.

Expand full comment

But in the interests of political diversity, i think their pov should be considered. The linked article is very provocative

Expand full comment

The very definition of nationalism is in dispute as is its relationship to Constitutional principles. I think Trump would disavow the definition of nationalism offered by Cato. Such as, “To preserve their dominance and promote their interests, nationalists here and elsewhere advocate government control not only of the culture, but of the economy as well.” My guess is that Trump would not favor the continuation of Cato’s example of government control of the economy as evidenced by ethanol subsidies, much to the dismay of Senator Grassley.

The article falls short on numerous fronts. “Opposition to most immigration, even the legal kind, is another common nationalist policy.“ Good grief! We’re not opposed to most immigration! We’re opposed to illegal immigration, with the idea that new, legal residents will embrace the founding documents and the ideas contained therein. Regarding the baby formula crisis, the fault for that debacle belongs more with the FDA than with protectionist policies. And to say that Trump’s position embraces “nationalist economic planning has produced poverty and stagnation — much like its socialist counterpart. Such were the results in nations like Argentina “ is laughable, given the obvious brotherhood between Trump and the Argentine antidote for this excess, Javier Milei. The article states:“Nationalism is no substitute for market prices and incentives.”. I think Trump would endorse this view because market prices and incentives are not antithetical to nationalism, rightly defined.

Those of us who believe the 2020 election was stolen, are we nationalists or just good-old-fashioned conspiracy theorists? We went to bed on election night with Trump comfortably ahead, and woke up to a different outcome. The mathematical graphs speak for themselves. Once again, the example doesn’t help the argument of Trump’s nationalism being the cause of his outrage.

More hooey from Cato: “Nationalists view the tribe as the building block of society, and individuals as serving the collective interests of that tribe...The fact that the United States is based on Enlightenment liberal values does not by itself prove we should maintain them….”

Gee, Cato, you fail to mention the Judeo-Christian influence on the founding, let’s see, where do those rights in the Declaration come from? From Enlightenment liberal values? And no, God is not mentioned in the Constitution. It just happens to be full of Judeo-Christian principles in the recognition of the nature of the human condition, with the potential for divine goodness while simultaneously beset by the tendency for avarice and greed.

Freedom comes from where? Enlightenment liberal values?

Expand full comment

Every election has been stolen due to the oligarchical structures entrenched within the democratic framework. True grassroots populism has been successfully subverted or assimilated with every attempt. We've been consistently deceived into missing this key point and I hope this time will be different. This will only happen if we become educated, self aware and vigilant.

Expand full comment

Nationalism inherently includes the degradation of individuality to some degree, or at least a cultural assimilation role. It is this social contract which permits a collective to endure as a united force defending individual liberty. It's paradoxical, much like nature itself.

Expand full comment

We need to stick to the original Constitution. Less government is best. It is a document that was inspired by God. That is why it works. When people start to try to add to or change the Constitution it is because they want to gain power over the people.

Expand full comment

George Orwells real name was Eric Arthur Blair.

Expand full comment