The Imperial United States of America: Its Constitution and the Truth of Its History

Among some “libertarian” circles, the ones that force real libertarians to add on otherwise redundant adjectives, it can become all too common to hear about the joys of “limited government” and how miraculous it would be if only it were possible to get people to “obey the Constitution.” Even those who supposedly understand the US Constitution’s flaws pay great reverence to its architects, its premises, and its body; however, their complaint, of course, is that it is not followed, but is that cliché even accurate? Not by any estimate of contextual history.

Sadly though, context, history, and reason seem to escape most American conservatives when it comes to the mythical, bedtime stories of the founding of their precious little empire. Too wrapped up in their fairytales of wooden teeth, cherry trees, Philadelphia, and Benjamin Franklin, Americans readily forget about the genocide of Native tribes resulting from US federal ordinances aiming to expand an “infant empire,” as George Washington would put it. Of course though, Americans don’t really care about brown people; moreover, the fact that the US treated Native tribes as conquered peoples, taking their land and killing them off as they pleased, probably won’t even resonate with a Ron Paul supporter. After all, the US Constitution was divinely written, right? Who cares if slavery was federally legitimized by defining black people as 2/5ths less human than a Congress full of rich, white men? Shays’ Rebellion, you say? Whiskey taxes and other assaults on the rights of the poor by the rich, you complain? Bah! No, decent, card-carrying member of the Church of the Constitution cares about that! Why should they? After all, no wealthy lawyers, tycoon generals, banking lobbyists, professional bureaucrats, or privileged, Anglican clergymen would ever die in a famine; no, only poor people and minorities.

Absolutely, though the American Revolution was great, truly a miracle and one of the single defining moments of a generational pro-liberty movement, it was lost, once and forever, in the United States with the establishment of the counter-revolutionary Constitution.

Clearly then, the Constitution is a disgusting document built and facilitated by disgusting counter-revolutionaries. Understanding this though, some still fall into the conservative trap, which sings squeakily and stubbornly, “the U.S. Constitution is not perfect . . . . But it is a pretty good [contrivance], I think, and it defines and limits the scope of government. When we get into the habit of disregarding it . . . we do so at our peril,” (67). Oh, yes! A cliché so often repeated by the conservatives and reformists that worship their precious Constitution like a golden calf.

“Well, at least it kind-of-sort-of limits the government,” they repeat, not realizing the pitiful caricature they paint for themselves.

Here, the pro-liberty movement comes to yet another crossroad, leaving radicals and fellow-travelers split in two between honesty and heresy, fortitude and fear, courage and compromise; though the horse of the corrupted comes to the stream, it will not yet take a drink. Though the compromised understand the Constitution is inferior to the libertarian society, they do not understand that the Constitution is inferior to most contemporary societies; indeed, the Constitution is inferior, period.
http://ronpaulforum.info/...