What cunning stunts and the drooling mongos of the Kwan lap it up.
Kabuki theater for a steaming fourth world turd.
Dante will have to update the Inferno for the no logic or reasoning FUSA.
Tons of respect for Brion and his scholarship on everything he speaks about.
However, and I’ll say this again, the Constitution is only as good as the willingness of the state and federal government to abide by it. Laws don’t matter when you have a military who is willing to follow the orders of a lawless government. States enforcing federal laws, that the feds aren’t themselves enforcing, only matters if you can back it up with military strength if the feds want to oppose the state intervention.
The Confederacy was well within its rights to secede. But that doesn’t matter to the 258,000 southerners who have their lives trying to defend that right. The issue at hand here is that Yankees believe that the matter was settled on the battlefield and not in a courtroom. I don’t agree that the matter was settled, but I can’t argue that battlefields supersede courtrooms.
Remember, the USSR had 3 Constitutions, until it didn’t. Of course, that played out differently, but it shows how trivial the Constitution is in reality.
If neither the governor of Texas, informed by his plethora of attorneys and a good education, along with whoever this person at the daily beast is, have no idea about the concept of federalism and compact theory, yet they are who they are nonetheless and are speaking for the dominant factions of the current chapter of the culture war, then how much can any of this stuff actually matter?
Its like libertarians arguing endlessly about monetary systems that nobody is ever gonna try, have never tried, and don’t care to even understand.
Brion… dude. Education is a peacetime necessity for posterity and I agree absolutely with you about the importance of all of this historically if for nothing else. But dude…. dude. Please for fuck sake, this isn’t a peacetime political environment. We are at war with these people and nobody has time for this. They certainly never stopped to ask how letting in 20 million brown people would be perceived from a constitutional perspective…. No, they did it because they could and because it was to their advantage therefore they don’t care, so neither can we right now.
What we need, is for people like you, to fully engage your wealth of knowledge as either a weapon against our enemy, or as a defense of our own interests explicitly. Yes, I mean history, used to inform ideology in pursuit of the 14 words. Not as an abstraction in pursuit of no particular end besides scholarship.
Reread the communist mannifesto. Then try to read Das Kapital. Tell me which is a more effective document to motivate people to do something (doesn’t matter what, thats not the point). Both books are crap, written by the same dipshit neckbeard, for very very different purposes. One is a masterpiece of white propaganda. One is a veritable tome of indecipherable intellectual nonsense that I doubt anyone has actually read, but just lie about having read because they know full well nobody else has either so they can never call them out on it. A book designed to hold down coffee tables in high wind.
We need the one right now, and not the other. The crisis in Texas isn’t a historical curiosity for pointy headed examination, its an inflection point in political events that could be incredibly important for states that may well serve as the only life raft Whitey has if the empire falls apart precipitously, as empires tend to do.
Quit waxing dogmatically about the constitution. Its a moot point. Maybe start writing a new declaration of independence! We are gonna need it.
Amen. IronicSA keeps getting to the correct point. Abstract arguing about abstractions are pointless unless they can be used for a meaningful debate on the fighting or debate ground. Brion’s abstraction doesn’t do it. We can go down a rabbit hole discussing how Constitutions represent the people and therefore the people (corrupted by immigrant blood poison) no longer represent the Constitution. But that is beyond the point at hand as IsockA said.
Contra distinctly, some are arguing that defending the TEXNG at Eagle Pass is pointless because the illegals are just invading elsewhere. There are millions of illegals pouring across the border and the Dems are preparing to probably use every defunct former military reservation and Wall Mart shopping center to be used for processing them into citizens and getting them to vote. Both points are also a meaningless abstractions because they miss the central point, namely that TX right now is taking on the Fed over the illegal alien invasion point, and over over the Constitutional points of Federalism and Treason and it’s all at that one geographic point where the last Confederate Army disappeared into history.
It’s Texas Patriots v Fed Gangsters. It’s that simple. We have other State NGs arriving into Texas as we speak to back Texas up. We have scores of thousands of volunteers descending on Eagle Pass to back Texas up. But we don’t have that central political rhetorical rallying point. We need someone who will articulate all the larger issues and crystallize it into one point that is linked to Shelby’s crossing in Eagle Pass. We don’t need an abstract libertarian argument over an abstract libertarian point. This is why Libertarians are gay.
Brion is absolutely right, the “compact theory” is not a “theory” at all, it is the actual, correct understanding of the Constitution of 1787.
Problem is, nobody on the Left and almost nobody on the Right gives a flying fuck about the Constitution of 1787. That constitution was murdered by force of arms in 1865, and the federal government, which was created by the states, became the master of the states.
I’m finally reading Hood’s “Waking Up from the American Dream.” Everything the Comments section is saying, he said back in 2014-16.
Here’s the most salient quote, to date (I’m not quite halfway through the book):
“The doctrine of equality race, gender, culture, and human quality enables the permanent entrenchment of a power structure elite that denies its own elitism. We have a ruling class that is secure precisely because it denies any hierarchical basis to its lordship. Its power is unchallenged because it denies it has power. It rules because it flatters its serfs that they rule themselves- in fact, telling them that no one rules them at all. And, unlike the high cultures of the past, the cultural products produced by our elite are far more degenerate, disgusting, and ugly than anything that exists among working communities.
Thus, America’s transformation into a culture that would have disgusted the patriots of the past is not a departure from the American ideal. In many ways, it is a fulfillment of that ideal. While the pendulum of political power may occasionally swing back and forth from the Republicans to the Democrats, the core ideal of wealth acquisition through the unlimited expansion of freedom and the abolition of privilege is never challenged at a fundamental level.” -p.24
McClanahan is interesting and well-spoken but his academic constitutionalist view of reality is too narrow, myopic. The creation of the union “by the states” really happened because the initial “confederate” arrangement among the former British colonies was inadequate to protect and advance the interests of private profit. The union had to be, and is, much greater, more powerful, than even the sum of ALL the parts (states) that created it, let alone a single part such as Texas. When the empire that was created by the business interests of the thirteen former British colonies adds more states (up to 37 more states have been added so far) and when annexes “territories,” such as Puerto Rico and other Caribbean islands, and Guam and other Pacific islands, and when it occupies “allies” (colonies) such as Japan, Germany, South Korea and many more (too many to list here), it will NEVER allow any added state, territory or colony to break free. The U.S.’s “rules based” (rule of private profit based) world order will be maintained unless a real peoples’ revolution or successful invasion by a foreign power, or a catastrophic act of God (plague? meteor strike?). This is the REAL political reality that McClanahan doesn’t seem to see: The reality of the “global hegemon,” the greatest capitalist empire in world history. The fantasy of Texas’ being in the U.S. “but not of” the U.S. is a contradiction of the purpose of the union: The union exists to protect and facilitate the advancement of business interests. Private, for-profit business CANNOT be confined to Texas, or any other state, or even within the official borders of the fifty-state imperial “homeland,” because the nature of capitalism is that it MUST maximize profit by expanding, defeating all competition, crossing all borders and finally achieving total, global monopoly. Imperialist war is required to achieve that aim. The U.S. has been at wat almost every year of its existence, but it took almost one hundred years to become strong enough to invade the eastern hemisphere, where it competed with and eventually replaced the British capitalist empire and other European capitalist empires that had evolved from feudal monarchy. We may not like reality, but we can’t change it by ignoring it.
An excellent Marxist explanation. But, it leaves out an important element. The changed role played by the American people. It was they who advanced the nation across the continent. It wasn’t business interests. The later simply didn’t have the power to plow thru an entire continent. While they helped advance it, the fact remains, that Capital, as Marxist understand it, could have disappeared and America would’ve still advanced over the continent.
But you are right, that now, it’s business interests which run this “American” empire. It’s business interests which occupied our current and former Allies from Japan to German and Britain to France. It’s business interests which occupied Cuba, Philippines, Hawaii. Business interests run the country, not the American people. In fact, the American people are now considered a superfluous part of the empire. But it wasn’t always like that. What changed?
The creation of the limited liability corporation
And
The War Between the States
The constitutionality of secession was never decided in the Supreme Court. Though the immediate cause of the war was over tariffs, slavery propelled public support for secession and the resultant war. As I’ve mentioned here before, every other country in the western hemisphere ended slavery without significant violence, including the two who did so after the US (Cuba in 1880, Brazil in 1888). The whole issue and subsequent war was ginned up by foreign business interests to facilitate their takeover of the American republic, as noted by Bismarck (who was definitely in a position to know)
> “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds prevailed… Therefore they sent their emissaries into the field to exploit the question of slavery and to open an abyss between the two sections of the Union.” ~ Otto von Bismarck
To make the preservation of the union imperative, the Rothschild-owned French empire invaded Mexico in 1861 over Juarez’s refusal to pay debts owed. Lincoln was killed for attempting to monetize the debt owed by the Union regime by printing the infamous ‘greenbacks’ (United States Notes). By 1871 the Treaty of Washington was signed, which obligated the United States to pay all debts incurred by the Confederacy, contravening the terms of the 14th amendment to the constitution itself (Section 4). Takeover was now fully underway, finished by 1914.
Yes your argument is basically correct, though it applies only in part before 1871. The above treaty was the model of destroying what remained of the constitution, step by step. The empire will refuse to allow Texas or any other province of satrapy to determine its own course. That’s the essential nature of empires, though it should be noted that some empires were clever enough to allow the nations contained within to enjoy a certain amount of leeway in selected matters like religion and language. Even the Ottomans couldn’t control every single aspect of life the way the WEF crowd seeks to.
What cunning stunts and the drooling mongos of the Kwan lap it up.
Kabuki theater for a steaming fourth world turd.
Dante will have to update the Inferno for the no logic or reasoning FUSA.
Tons of respect for Brion and his scholarship on everything he speaks about.
However, and I’ll say this again, the Constitution is only as good as the willingness of the state and federal government to abide by it. Laws don’t matter when you have a military who is willing to follow the orders of a lawless government. States enforcing federal laws, that the feds aren’t themselves enforcing, only matters if you can back it up with military strength if the feds want to oppose the state intervention.
The Confederacy was well within its rights to secede. But that doesn’t matter to the 258,000 southerners who have their lives trying to defend that right. The issue at hand here is that Yankees believe that the matter was settled on the battlefield and not in a courtroom. I don’t agree that the matter was settled, but I can’t argue that battlefields supersede courtrooms.
Remember, the USSR had 3 Constitutions, until it didn’t. Of course, that played out differently, but it shows how trivial the Constitution is in reality.
If neither the governor of Texas, informed by his plethora of attorneys and a good education, along with whoever this person at the daily beast is, have no idea about the concept of federalism and compact theory, yet they are who they are nonetheless and are speaking for the dominant factions of the current chapter of the culture war, then how much can any of this stuff actually matter?
Its like libertarians arguing endlessly about monetary systems that nobody is ever gonna try, have never tried, and don’t care to even understand.
Brion… dude. Education is a peacetime necessity for posterity and I agree absolutely with you about the importance of all of this historically if for nothing else. But dude…. dude. Please for fuck sake, this isn’t a peacetime political environment. We are at war with these people and nobody has time for this. They certainly never stopped to ask how letting in 20 million brown people would be perceived from a constitutional perspective…. No, they did it because they could and because it was to their advantage therefore they don’t care, so neither can we right now.
What we need, is for people like you, to fully engage your wealth of knowledge as either a weapon against our enemy, or as a defense of our own interests explicitly. Yes, I mean history, used to inform ideology in pursuit of the 14 words. Not as an abstraction in pursuit of no particular end besides scholarship.
Reread the communist mannifesto. Then try to read Das Kapital. Tell me which is a more effective document to motivate people to do something (doesn’t matter what, thats not the point). Both books are crap, written by the same dipshit neckbeard, for very very different purposes. One is a masterpiece of white propaganda. One is a veritable tome of indecipherable intellectual nonsense that I doubt anyone has actually read, but just lie about having read because they know full well nobody else has either so they can never call them out on it. A book designed to hold down coffee tables in high wind.
We need the one right now, and not the other. The crisis in Texas isn’t a historical curiosity for pointy headed examination, its an inflection point in political events that could be incredibly important for states that may well serve as the only life raft Whitey has if the empire falls apart precipitously, as empires tend to do.
Quit waxing dogmatically about the constitution. Its a moot point. Maybe start writing a new declaration of independence! We are gonna need it.
Amen. IronicSA keeps getting to the correct point. Abstract arguing about abstractions are pointless unless they can be used for a meaningful debate on the fighting or debate ground. Brion’s abstraction doesn’t do it. We can go down a rabbit hole discussing how Constitutions represent the people and therefore the people (corrupted by immigrant blood poison) no longer represent the Constitution. But that is beyond the point at hand as IsockA said.
Contra distinctly, some are arguing that defending the TEXNG at Eagle Pass is pointless because the illegals are just invading elsewhere. There are millions of illegals pouring across the border and the Dems are preparing to probably use every defunct former military reservation and Wall Mart shopping center to be used for processing them into citizens and getting them to vote. Both points are also a meaningless abstractions because they miss the central point, namely that TX right now is taking on the Fed over the illegal alien invasion point, and over over the Constitutional points of Federalism and Treason and it’s all at that one geographic point where the last Confederate Army disappeared into history.
It’s Texas Patriots v Fed Gangsters. It’s that simple. We have other State NGs arriving into Texas as we speak to back Texas up. We have scores of thousands of volunteers descending on Eagle Pass to back Texas up. But we don’t have that central political rhetorical rallying point. We need someone who will articulate all the larger issues and crystallize it into one point that is linked to Shelby’s crossing in Eagle Pass. We don’t need an abstract libertarian argument over an abstract libertarian point. This is why Libertarians are gay.
Brion is absolutely right, the “compact theory” is not a “theory” at all, it is the actual, correct understanding of the Constitution of 1787.
Problem is, nobody on the Left and almost nobody on the Right gives a flying fuck about the Constitution of 1787. That constitution was murdered by force of arms in 1865, and the federal government, which was created by the states, became the master of the states.
I’m finally reading Hood’s “Waking Up from the American Dream.” Everything the Comments section is saying, he said back in 2014-16.
Here’s the most salient quote, to date (I’m not quite halfway through the book):
“The doctrine of equality race, gender, culture, and human quality enables the permanent entrenchment of a power structure elite that denies its own elitism. We have a ruling class that is secure precisely because it denies any hierarchical basis to its lordship. Its power is unchallenged because it denies it has power. It rules because it flatters its serfs that they rule themselves- in fact, telling them that no one rules them at all. And, unlike the high cultures of the past, the cultural products produced by our elite are far more degenerate, disgusting, and ugly than anything that exists among working communities.
Thus, America’s transformation into a culture that would have disgusted the patriots of the past is not a departure from the American ideal. In many ways, it is a fulfillment of that ideal. While the pendulum of political power may occasionally swing back and forth from the Republicans to the Democrats, the core ideal of wealth acquisition through the unlimited expansion of freedom and the abolition of privilege is never challenged at a fundamental level.” -p.24
McClanahan is interesting and well-spoken but his academic constitutionalist view of reality is too narrow, myopic. The creation of the union “by the states” really happened because the initial “confederate” arrangement among the former British colonies was inadequate to protect and advance the interests of private profit. The union had to be, and is, much greater, more powerful, than even the sum of ALL the parts (states) that created it, let alone a single part such as Texas. When the empire that was created by the business interests of the thirteen former British colonies adds more states (up to 37 more states have been added so far) and when annexes “territories,” such as Puerto Rico and other Caribbean islands, and Guam and other Pacific islands, and when it occupies “allies” (colonies) such as Japan, Germany, South Korea and many more (too many to list here), it will NEVER allow any added state, territory or colony to break free. The U.S.’s “rules based” (rule of private profit based) world order will be maintained unless a real peoples’ revolution or successful invasion by a foreign power, or a catastrophic act of God (plague? meteor strike?). This is the REAL political reality that McClanahan doesn’t seem to see: The reality of the “global hegemon,” the greatest capitalist empire in world history. The fantasy of Texas’ being in the U.S. “but not of” the U.S. is a contradiction of the purpose of the union: The union exists to protect and facilitate the advancement of business interests. Private, for-profit business CANNOT be confined to Texas, or any other state, or even within the official borders of the fifty-state imperial “homeland,” because the nature of capitalism is that it MUST maximize profit by expanding, defeating all competition, crossing all borders and finally achieving total, global monopoly. Imperialist war is required to achieve that aim. The U.S. has been at wat almost every year of its existence, but it took almost one hundred years to become strong enough to invade the eastern hemisphere, where it competed with and eventually replaced the British capitalist empire and other European capitalist empires that had evolved from feudal monarchy. We may not like reality, but we can’t change it by ignoring it.
An excellent Marxist explanation. But, it leaves out an important element. The changed role played by the American people. It was they who advanced the nation across the continent. It wasn’t business interests. The later simply didn’t have the power to plow thru an entire continent. While they helped advance it, the fact remains, that Capital, as Marxist understand it, could have disappeared and America would’ve still advanced over the continent.
But you are right, that now, it’s business interests which run this “American” empire. It’s business interests which occupied our current and former Allies from Japan to German and Britain to France. It’s business interests which occupied Cuba, Philippines, Hawaii. Business interests run the country, not the American people. In fact, the American people are now considered a superfluous part of the empire. But it wasn’t always like that. What changed?
The creation of the limited liability corporation
And
The War Between the States
The constitutionality of secession was never decided in the Supreme Court. Though the immediate cause of the war was over tariffs, slavery propelled public support for secession and the resultant war. As I’ve mentioned here before, every other country in the western hemisphere ended slavery without significant violence, including the two who did so after the US (Cuba in 1880, Brazil in 1888). The whole issue and subsequent war was ginned up by foreign business interests to facilitate their takeover of the American republic, as noted by Bismarck (who was definitely in a position to know)
> “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination over the world. The voice of the Rothschilds prevailed… Therefore they sent their emissaries into the field to exploit the question of slavery and to open an abyss between the two sections of the Union.” ~ Otto von Bismarck
To make the preservation of the union imperative, the Rothschild-owned French empire invaded Mexico in 1861 over Juarez’s refusal to pay debts owed. Lincoln was killed for attempting to monetize the debt owed by the Union regime by printing the infamous ‘greenbacks’ (United States Notes). By 1871 the Treaty of Washington was signed, which obligated the United States to pay all debts incurred by the Confederacy, contravening the terms of the 14th amendment to the constitution itself (Section 4). Takeover was now fully underway, finished by 1914.
Yes your argument is basically correct, though it applies only in part before 1871. The above treaty was the model of destroying what remained of the constitution, step by step. The empire will refuse to allow Texas or any other province of satrapy to determine its own course. That’s the essential nature of empires, though it should be noted that some empires were clever enough to allow the nations contained within to enjoy a certain amount of leeway in selected matters like religion and language. Even the Ottomans couldn’t control every single aspect of life the way the WEF crowd seeks to.