New England Patriot

Fear Itself

“The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.” – Franklin Delano Roosevelt, First Inaugural Address

It has become popular to believe the end is near.

While various prophecies and financial data seem to suggest with certainty that calamity is coming, we need to live with humility and never assume the worst. It is a fine line to walk between the knowing that something has gone terribly wrong in the world and believing that it will all end tomorrow.

We should not think that the trajectory of things is prematurely terminal. That is, the world has hung on a lot longer than many people would have thought. And it may continue to hold out in defiance of the conventional wisdom of some.

I can remember in 2008 becoming actively aware of the “prepper” movement. While “survivalism” and the idea of preparing for harsh times had been gradually fermenting beneath the outward appearance of a healthy society, it took the financial crisis of the last decade to force an awakening in many people to the dangers of social collapse, creeping tyranny, and the prospect that the our generation’s future may not be so bright as its past.

I was one of those who “woke up” to such a possibility, and began to prepare for it.

As a participant in what many would call “alternative media,” the “liberty movement,” and being disposed to a particular Christian end-times eschatology, I can report that there are many people who spend a lot of time thinking about doom and gloom. And this is not necessarily wrong.

It is important to take an accurate account of the world we live in. It would be wrong to completely deny the evil currents at work in our world today, or deny the potentially devastating effects it may ultimately have on it.

However, it is also wrong to assume that because evil exists in the world that the world is doomed to destruction tomorrow. Likewise, because our American system is based heavily in fragile systems that endanger our financial, political, and spiritual freedoms, it would be wrong to believe those systems must be doomed to fail tomorrow.

In reality, these systems have proven more durable than many in the aforementioned movements have predicted. Where does that leave us?

I think it leaves us in a place where we have to acknowledge the providence of God, and the work that He is doing in our world to maintain the blessings of order, even in the face of subversive evils that erode the efficacy and justice behind those systems.

Today’s social systems may be poor and getting worse, but it does not seem to be God’s plan to simply let those systems fail like a house of cards. Instead, it seems to be God’s plan to gird those systems with his grace for as long as possible, allowing them to endure for, perhaps, the purposes of protecting, saving, and ultimately loving his children while the time can still be redeemed.

I have no doubt that the systems of the world are going to come crashing down. My experience in life tells me that evil is on the march, and the good people of America and nations around the world need to be prepared to defend themselves and those who are in need from the profligate sin that is encroaching on every boundary of the civilized world. The Bible tells us that time is short, and that the day will come like at thief in the night when everything will change.

For now, however, we have the benefit of seeing that many, in their fervor, have jumped the gun on checking-out and predicting apocalypse before its time. In the end, God’s time is the only time that matters. Especially now, when the architecture of the end is becoming more and more evident, we should appreciate how God is extending the days to benefit us, and not assume the end before it comes.

Fear is a powerful motivator. For lack of purpose, however, we should not become enamored with the power of fear and let it take over our thinking. Now is a time for courage, not panic. Now is a time to build good things, not to stop because we fear the tearing down is about to begin. Now is the time to get out and help others, not to bury our treasures and help ourselves.

Things will happen in God’s time, and we must remain humble.

December 8, 2011

Getting The Second Amendment Right

“A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

- United States Constitution, Amendment II

The Second Amendment is misunderstood by most Americans.

The debate rages concerning the lawfulness of handguns, assault rifles and their parts, as issues about home and personal defense dominate firearms-related headlines.

While the lawfulness of firearms is at the heart of the Second Amendment, and while home defense should be a vital part of every American’s life, the debate has been sidetracked from its most important thrust.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to own weapons for their employment against tyranny should it threaten the nation from within or from without.

Putting aside the subject of personal defense, the Second Amendment of the Constitution really guarantees the right of the American citizen to defend himself and his family against tyranny.

The heart and soul of the amendment is the belief that only the force of arms can be a reasonable deterrent, and ultimately a tool against, those who would seek to take American freedom.

When the issue is framed in this light, the questions concerning the lawfulness of personal sidearms and rifle accessories pale next to the fundamental guarantee of the Constitution.

As conceived, each American citizen is, under the Second Amendment, granted the right to own and carry a military pattern weapon against enemies of the free state. Else, what use is this amendment to anyone?

Today’s debate has sought to take the teeth from the Second Amendment by whittling away at its edges, first by narrowing its scope and then by skirting its intent.

By taking away the rights of Americans to own some types of arms, and then by focusing on uses implicit but secondary to the amendment’s foundational guarantee, the allies of tyrants have been able to seriously damage what is supposed to be a Constitutional insurance policy against tyranny.

When considering the Second Amendment, we should look it square in the eyes and understand what it’s there for, and what it’s really saying.

“A well regulated militia” is a citizen or group of citizens organized of their own accord in a military fashion.

“Being necessary to” denotes having a foundational or fundamental nature in its pertinence.

“The security of” a thing is the preservation of its essential structure and functions.

“A free state” is one that retains the sovereignty to act by the consent of the governed.

“The right of the people” refers to a naturally occurring permission for individuals and groups, which the government has been empowered by the people to protect.

“To keep and bear” is to own and carry.

“Arms” are weapons.

“Shall not be” is an imperative, nullifying the possibility of a certain condition.

“Infringed” means to encroach, or trespass against.

As such, the Second Amendment is very clear, and like much of the Constitution, is written to favor an openness of definition in order to avoid curtailing freedom inadvertently.

For example, where it refers to “arms,” the Second Amendment does not say, “Only semi-automatic arms.”

Nor does the Second Amendment say, “Only arms of a certain ammunition capacity.”

Nor, “Only arms with no bayonet lugs, collapsible stocks, pistol grips, or flash suppressors.”

Yet, somehow laws just such as these have infringed upon the types of arms the people are permitted by the government to keep and bear.

From a purely structural point of view, these laws are a violation of the Constitution, and the right of the people. In fact, they make no sense.

If the people of the United States ratified the Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms without infringement under its Second Amendment, then for the government empowered by that Constitution to turn around and infringe upon that right is unlawful.

Thus, any law that seeks to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms is unconstitutional, and null in an absolute sense.

In this, we find the true nature, intent, and utility of the Second Amendment of the Constitution.

The people empower their government through their consent with the duties of protecting the people and their rights.

Guaranteeing the right of the people to keep and bear arms in a military manner amongst the citizenry, the Second Amendment in turn protects the people from the government.

If, then, the government of the people makes motions to curtail the freedom of the people, and thus usurp the sovereignty of the free state, the people are already empowered with a means to keep or take back their freedom.

Thus, the Second Amendment is like an insurance policy within the Constitution. So long as it remains unthreatened, it is content to lie dormant amongst the citizenry.

However, if at any time, the Second Amendment becomes threatened by a tyranny that would fear its power, the citizens of the free state would activate the right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to secure their freedom.

In effect, the Second Amendment is a lot like liberty’s “canary in the coal mine.” It is the leading indicator of a threat to freedom, providing both the alarm as well as the means to defend freedom simultaneously.

It’s no wonder that tyranny is deathly afraid of the Second Amendment of the Constitution. Furthermore, it’s no wonder that the cause of tyranny would seek to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms at every turn. They understand, as did the framers of the Constitution, that only the force of arms in the hands of a free people can successfully ensure the security of a free state.

For us as American patriots, it is imperative that we not shy away from our Second Amendment.

It is fundamental to our liberty to understand that the Second Amendment is not about hunting or home defense, this type of gun or that, but rather it is a cornerstone in the mindset of liberty. Americans must appreciate and embrace the full extent of the Second Amendment, for only in its fullness does it serve the purpose for which it was entrusted to us; to ensure the security of our free state.

1 comment

December 7, 2011

One World Government Primer

We’re going to have a “one world government.” It’s just a matter of when… and how.

Political organization through the years has always trended toward increasing layers of government; individual, family, civic, state, federal… it’s only natural that world government would come about. Technology is what makes it possible, in large part, bringing people together through communication and transportation.

At this point in history, we are starting to see the web of humanity drawing close enough across oceans and continents to not only enable a government that spans the world, but to make a compelling case for its existence.

Why does any government exist? To create and execute laws, and provide for the common defense.

Given the complexity and frequency of interaction between disparate parties across the globe, highlighted by the strife we see in financial markets and the scope of military campaigns, the case for a world government is being made.

Basically, a world government is necessary to keep one group from violating the rights of another. That is the role of good government; that is the only role of good government. When the world stage sees immense players threatening other players, the time for a regulating body that can span the scope of affairs has come.

The issue, then, is not if, but when and how.

Indeed, depending on how world government is structured, and the powers that it is allowed to take for itself, a world government could be a monumental success or failure. At the risk of sounding hyperbolic, world government may be the single riskiest undertaking ever attempted by mankind.

The result could be a wonderful sword and shield for the cause of liberty, or it could be a heinous sword and shield against the cause of liberty. It all depends on which side such a government is arranged.

Why bring this up now?

There are a lot of immediate problems in the countries and regions around the world, and certainly each of us has a lot on our plates individually. But the handwriting on the wall tells us that the world is rapidly changing, and from great crises come about great changes.

Those changes are being defined by the choices of men and nations now. From the chaos in financial and monetary circles to the military-industrial complex at work around the world, it seems evident that the old order of things is rapidly passing away.

More than likely, the interim period between what has been and what is to come is going to be chaotic, perhaps bloody, and wrought with strife. Ultimately, it will form the beginning of something new; a world order will arise.

The question is, what will that order look like?

Right now, there are forces and organizations around the world jockeying for power in what will be the new world order. To be blunt, many of these interests are tyrannical. If they succeed in defining the new world order, the result is going to be a terrible oligarchy and a dark age for mankind.

However, as always, the cause of liberty is at work today as well. If this should define the new world order, the result might be an umbrella of prosperity beneath which humanity would be free to thrive.

A world government of limited powers, with rights and liberty guaranteed to all people, respecting the sovereignty and authority of nations and their inhabitants within its framework, must fill the emerging global power vacuum.

We must be proactive in defining a vision for the future of a world government, free, because unfortunately those who would have tyranny are already busy defining and putting forth theirs.