The American People Can Start The 2nd (3rd?) American Revolution. Here Was The 1st Nail In The Coffin Of The Constitution.Submitted by Cyril on Thu, 05/23/2013 - 06:10
It took me a while to find out about it.
Read: to fully realize the veiled intent.
Yes, this was the first nail in the coffin and it matters as much as all the others that followed.
Because if one talks about a coffin and about a nail, this denotes the displayed intent, the start of going for action... to destroy.
If I dare say:
we can almost "forget" about the 16th Amendment.
we can almost "forget" about the Federal Reserve Act.
Those are pleasant distractions compared to their predecessor, first of their kind... nail in the coffin of the Constitution.
Here it was to start and to last, until the complete destruction:
The nail was hammered on July 9, 1868:
"[...] Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, [...] shall not be questioned [...]"
Do you see the nail?
Do you really see it? Emphasis mine.
It's not about nitpicking on "validity". Or "authorized by law", or etc.
It's about what I see as THE GREATEST OXYMORON instrument of plunder ever invented.
What is debt?
I can always open a dictionary on "debt" alone, but I can also phrase it in my own words, to convey the same idea:
It's a temporary extension of one's fairly acquired credit, and subject to repayment.
If I give someone credit for something they have said, done, or thought, I RECKON the value of what they produced, or uttered, expressed.
Their "credit" is their reputation that I am willing to acknowledge, spontaneously, without anyone, including them, forcing me to do so.
Now, of course, we all have only limited "credit" at any point in time, in reputation, or stocks of goods, capital, wealth, you name it.
We sometimes wish we had more, so, we borrow. We find someone else (individual or several) to "extend" our credit, by temporarily granting us MORE in addition to what we actually own, in values.
Doesn't this mutual consent - which consists in borrowing on one side, and in lending, on the other - LOGICALLY implies, FIRST AND FOREMOST, the SHARED PREMISES, by BOTH parties, that this extension of credit CAN, OUGHT, AND WILL be repaid (by the borrower, to the lender - with or without interests)?
If it does... what is the SECOND most important assumption to be made?
Isn't it that the borrower ACTUALLY HAS the capabilities to repay, in anything of value?
So, let's look again at "public debt"... we are presented with a strange concept, now:
that the "public interest" represented by the force of government and the laws it enforces, ever had, or will be capable to have, or to produce, ANYTHING of value.
But isn't government force only? Aren't laws supposed to be about the rendering of justice only?
Where is "the product", there? Where is the value, there, supposed to "repay" for a "public debt"?
In truth: there is none.
Government cannot produce anything.
It can only enforce, and sometimes, OFTEN ACTUALLY! with such force which the People granted it, it can TAKE from the People, or even, redistribute - unjustly, IMO, although we can still find proponents for arbitrary redistribution by govt, these days.
Anyway, back to the point:
The mere installment and acceptance of government by the People STILL cannot "create" anything of value which can be used to repay anything - AND EVEN LESS A SUPPOSED "EXTENSION OF CREDIT" which would have been granted to it.
The only "credit", IMMUTABLE, NON-EXTENSIBLE, of government and just laws, that can be acknowledged is in its defense and protection of the natural rights of the People, who are BORN with those rights, that the government and laws never "granted" the people with.
This is at least the uncontroversial, and non-negotiable spirit of the Bill of Rights, isn't it?
So... "public debt"... just does not make any sense - it is self-contradictory - a pure oxymoron, which from minute #1 was promising to be utterly hazardous, disastrous.
YOU SIMPLY CANNOT HAVE CREATED DEBT IF YOUR "CREDIT" WAS NON-EXTENSIBLE - EVEN TEMPORARILY - IN THE FIRST PLACE
You can EVEN make this a business rule in code, in a computer program which operates on a model about anything:
if the "credit" variable - on that particular instance/object called "government" - is in fact A CONVENTIONALLY FROZEN, DEEMED TO BE A CONSTANT IN TIME AND SPACE, NON-EXTENSIBLE BY DESIGN - there is NO WAY you can associate to it ANY "debt" (temporary extension to compensated later on).
Meanwhile the "credit" of individuals or corporations IS extensible - with "private debt" - which ties them to the lenders of same or different kinds, numbers, etc. There, borrowers CAN, theoretically at least, repay, as THEY'RE ASSUMED UPFRONT, capable to produce something or provide services of value.
Government, being force, can only have assets, time, energy that the People have accepted TO GIVE AWAY, TO ABANDON to it, but government NEVER produces ANYTHING out and of itself.
Even less : it CANNOT REPAY for anything it gets, or take, from the People. Government ought to say "thank you" more often, though.
Government only has a symbolic "credit" - small or big, doesn't matter - but anyway an ABSOLUTELY CONSTANT, NON-EXTENSIBLE "credit".
Government cannot create any meaningful "public debt".
If words mean ANYTHING.
Thus, on this "public debt" deception:
This, IMO, was the origin of everything else of central planning, central management of the People, being denied their Constitutional rights slowly but surely through always more numerous unjust laws and unconstitutional Acts.
THIS was the first nail in the coffin.
There is no point in wasting time talking about the "validity" or what the "public debt" ought to denote, encompass.
For it cannot denote anything.
This was the first tool, the first nail, to strip the People out, down the road, inevitably of EVERY SINGLE OF THEIR INALIENABLE rights.
Because the state had found there the ultimate justification to weaken the People's wealth, to steal from them, ad infinitum, and by any means it would see fit ... FOR WHATEVER AGENDA IT WOULD DEEM useful to sustain itself and to keep growing.
Nothing can be surprising any longer.
The reinstatement of central banking, of new oligarchies controlling the money (preferably fake, for their purposes as central tyrannical managers) was only one out of many of the STRICTLY LOGICAL consequence of accepting this phrase in the section 4 of the 14th Amendment.
As I see it, we ought to REJECT THE VERY NON-EXISTENT CONCEPT of "public debt" - ON STRICTLY LOGICAL GROUNDS - just like sane people, sane cultures usually reject "theft" or "slavery" or "abuse" or, etc - on grounds of common, natural morality.
It is a fraudulent notion which may have worked for centuries all over the place under various tyrannies, but until the 14th Amendment, the United States of America were A UNIQUE NEW PLACE for liberty, peace, and prosperity, precisely because, even beyond the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the rule of law, of the land HADN'T INTRODUCED (yet) anything of this classical tool of plunder over populations.
We can re-read the Romans and about the Fall of Rome if we need refreshers.
Or the Terror period in the French Revolution (which soon after 1789 failed, btw - unlike in the USA). Etc.
Call "CRIMINAL NON-SENSE!" on the so-called "public debt", American people.
Get rid of it. Make it indefensible, morally, and legally.
And maybe, one day, the Republic will be restored.
I am afraid it simply cannot be otherwise, as long as this OXYMORON of plunder will be around.
Recall Congress. Or fire them.
Just get rid of "public debt". Throw it away TO OBLIVION.
Say "public debt BE DAMNED" in language, to start with.
Indeed, in truth:
LOOK AT "YOUR" WARS.
They are THE UGLY, INHUMANE OFFSPRINGS of that "public debt" the traitors have forced on you.
ARE THEY NOT?
Just look back at how they unfolded.
I don't think I'm inventing anything.