Leverage for Resistance

Someone has asked the question: Just what do I mean by saying I’ll defend the US Constitution? As you might expect, there’s a story behind that, and not everyone tells the same story.

Short answer: It boils down to protecting those residents of the US and whatever version of shalom they have.

Long answer: Let me unwind that for you. I’m very cynical about the US Constitution and how it was used in founding our government. In other words, I am utterly convinced it was a propaganda play by some elitists who had evil plans. They wrote it and advertised it according to what they wanted the voting population to believe, not what they actually intended to do. It was a cover story. Further, I believe the Federalist Papers were also mostly bullshit; the people promoting that stuff didn’t actually believe all of it, but they wanted the people to believe it.

Thus, what they proposed in the US Constitution is essentially a libertarian thesis. This would teach the people to mind their own business and cause a ruckus only when their interests are infringed a little too much. The elites intended to hide their infringements and profit from the hiding, and were laying out in their private counsels ways they could explain this infringement and make it sound absolutely necessary for the interests of the people.

No sooner was this constitution approved than the government officials proceeded to exploit the loopholes they carefully wove into it. But part of the problem is that some of the folks at the Constitutional Convention actually did believe all that crap, and there were frequent disputes. Within a few decades, those people were shuffled out of government offices or marginalized in other ways.

Please recall that Thomas Jefferson said that this kind of conflict would mean a bloody revolt just about every twenty years or so. Obviously he didn’t meant that literally, but when people in power use semantic wrangling to overcome resistance, it can be used against them just the same.

While I find the US Constitution repugnant in many ways, I find it is an excellent weapon against our real enemies. It can be wielded against government officials. That is, it becomes the justification for an awful lot of house-cleaning were the people to tire of the yoke of slavery. Taken as it stands, the US Constitution is a very libertarian statement of limiting government, and when government refuses to be limited, it’s all the justification anyone needs for a constitutional revolt.

Granted, I’m not a “constitutionalist.” I’m still operating from a wholly alien set of assumptions, to include rejecting the entire range of Western mythology. What I’m doing is taking advantage of a thread within the Enlightenment philosophy behind the Constitution that says folks should be free to follow their own convictions, regardless how misguided they may be in the eyes of most other people. People were free to become prissy middle-class materialists, but it’s not required by any means. In other words, it is quite within the Constitution for you and I to form our own private community around the biblical social model of covenant tribal feudalism, as long as we don’t force it on any adults who don’t want it. That’s fine with us. Indeed, given the fall of humanity and the prophesied trend of moral decline, that’s about as good as we can hope for.

I’m not a commander; I’m not going to organize an armed force to go after all the bad guys. I’m more of an operations and support guy (in military parlance, S-3 and S-4). And apart from the standard tactical training that all military folks receive, my real expertise is in computer technology. So that amounts to cyber operations and equipment. I wouldn’t hesitate to use violence when it suits the context, but that’s not what I do best. As I’ve said in the past, the real war will be an information war over the Internet. I still believe that. And I’m not going to lead this revolt, but I will participate in what is already happening.

So there will also be periods of physical violence arising from that wider strategic conflict. I see no problem with that; there’s no way to avoid it in the long run. But the biggest problem is that humanity has moved to the virtual world and there’s no pulling them back out short of destroying all the technology. That could happen, but folks would just build it again because everyone has been conditioned to prefer the virtual realm. It serves no purpose to rail against the facts; this is the world we live in today. So while you and I as heart-led servants of Christ know that we will always seek face-to-face fellowship in the Spirit, the His lost sheep are out there on the Net.

So along with some limited violent conflict now and then, the focus of a genuine nationalist insurgency is in the virtual realm. Right now the real problem is how the globalist-socialist-SJW threat has already hijacked most of the network services that people use just living day to day. We have to work out how to combat that problem, and it’s not a simple answer.

More on that in the next post. For now, just understand that for me to defend the US Constitution means defending the prerogatives of people to choose how they shall live, and to resist those who have flatly admitted the intend to take that away.

About Ed Hurst

Disabled Veteran, prophet of God's Laws, Bible History teacher, wannabe writer, volunteer computer technician, cyclist, Social Science researcher
This entry was posted in eldercraft and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.