A great 5-minute summary of Popular Sovereignty in the Constitution
A Constitutional scholar (who appeared before Biden's so-called Presidential Commission to investigate the Supreme Court) explains the difference between the democratic and republican versions of the critical Constitutional principle of Popular Sovereignty.
Worth much more than the mere eight minutes it takes.
Worth much more than the mere eight minutes it takes.
While the language of these documents seems a bit stilted for our modern reading, it does give us insight into how they arrived at the final document. Modern liberals conveniently pretend no such documents exist, or dispute they came from any of the founders, even though later writings identify the authors.
The Anti-federalist Papers are inspiring reading and explain exactly why the Bill of Rights is needed. They accurately predict nearly every statist act against individual liberty that we have seen.
Of course, no public school would ever recommend a student read such training for insurrection.
I recommend both and they should be required reading in every school. I would use them as material for the test required to be able to vote.
What many do not realize is that Federalism is actually a middle-ground between the tyranny of the national executive and the regional tyranny of the masses, i.e. direct democracy. If one leans too heavily to either side, liberty fails. We have unfortunately drifted toward the tyranny of a national executive in the form of a massive bureaucracy - the executive branch. Perhaps the greatest single example is the personal income tax, as it gives the Federal government unprecedented power over the lives of the citizenry - including acting as a muzzle to free speech. Additionally, the Legislative Branch and options for State repudiation have also been similarly compromised through the direct election of Senators. It should be noted that BOTH of these provisions were enacted by Constitutional Amendment.
Had the anti-Federalists won, the colonies would have remained mired in debt and unable to pay their war obligations. They would have remained as a fractious, loose coalition of independent nations. Even when they did band together, they were woefully unprepared to fight the British. The War of 1812 was proof of that even beyond the miraculous victories by Washington in the Revolutionary War. Had the colonies remained separate as per the Articles of Confederation, they would have been individually seized by the European nations - and then overcome and destroyed. These were valid arguments made by the Federalist papers. Now we face exactly the opposite problem: a problem of a tyranny of the executive. An overwhelming executive bureaucracy - rather than the legislature - carries out psuedo-lawmaking with nothing more than passing oversight by Congress. Well did the Anti-Federalists warn of this.
What is needed is a return to a proper balance of Federalism which recognizes the individual sovereignty of the States and their supremacy in every aspect NOT directly and specifically ceded to the Federal government. We need a faithful interpretation of the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, including a disbanding of 90%+ of the federal bureaucracy. We need to pass Constitutional Amendments again declaring the Federal income tax null and void and a return of the States rights to veto legislation through their agents: Senators.
I wonder if there was an easy way for individuals to opt out of tax legislation would it be apparent which government revenues are really supported by the People?
No general fund for federal spending and very limited borrowing might force people to consider which spending is worth being enslaved.
As to the rest, it's very easy to point fingers but it does nothing to rectify the problems at hand. The sad fact is that we are headed toward a collapsed economy because those in power refuse to take the steps necessary to become fiscally solvent and responsible.
not these liars and traitors known as politicians