Amerika

Posts Tagged ‘constitution’

Mitch McConnell Demonstrates Why We Need To Stop The Direct Election of US Senators

Sunday, December 10th, 2017

Is there a more degenerate, repulsive, slug of senatorial misrepresentation in Amerika than Mitch McConnell?

Perhaps, perhaps there is somebody just as bad. There is simply no way that Judge Roy Moore is morally fit to stand in the company of deeply caring human beings like Senator Robert Menendez. The answer to my rhetorical question doesn’t really matter. What we need to examine here is process.

Why is it that we get a US Senate fertilized by such excremental moral cretins?

The answer is obvious. We The People elected them via the democratic process. It guarantees a continuation of the Cathedral-Sponsored Kakistocracy. The superpositioned results of our biannual senatorial elections have been similar for years. Watching our two clownshow political parties via for Senatorial supremacy is akin to watching two tanking NBA squads playing a meaningless late season game in hopes of losing to one another and securing more balls in the draft lottery. The final score matters little. The platforms of either candidate, in the typical senatorial election; are about as intellectually stimulating as a proctological exam. Remember how Mitch McConnell was going to repeal and replace ObamaCare? Relax; Mitch doesn’t either.

Giving the US Constitution the same cursory speed-read Barack Obama probably did while in law school, we see that it is a vitally important organ of the US Government. It was intended to provide each state an opportunity to balance the power of the Federal Government. Because of this, the Founding Fathers did not leave it up to chance. They allowed State Legislators to select their own.

Americans did not directly vote for senators for the first 125 years of the Federal Government. The Constitution, as it was adopted in 1788, stated that senators would be elected by state legislatures. The first proposal to amend the Constitution to elect senators by popular vote was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives in 1826, but the idea did not gain considerable support until the late 19th century when several problems related to Senate elections had become evident.

Now fans of domineering federal imperialism couldn’t let this sort check and balance stand between them and the opportunity to elect Teddy Kennedy, Theodore Bilbo, Robert Byrd or Lindsay Grahamaphrodite. With the hateful Seventeenth Amendment in place, John McCain found it far easier to land in the US Senate than he seemed to find it when he tried to land on an aircraft carrier. It took California to demonstrate the pure and utter heinousness of the Seventeenth. The dysgenic display of electoral ignorance gave us the proud, unbroken lineage of Diane Feinstein, Barbara Boxer and Kamala Harris. Never since the direct incestuous conjugation of the Spanish Hapsburgs has such an ongoing display of human evolution in reverse been afforded such a position of power and prestige. The current and recent course of the United States Senate is a deep and profound disgrace to our legacy as a nation and a people.

But there is an answer. It’s well known and it waits for us to harken back to. We only need to brush the dust of our founding documents. I mean if we really are Constitutional Conservatives, here’s how we clear away the toxic, contaminating train-wreck that is the current US. Senate. We go back to what initially worked in Amerika and select our US Senate properly.

Section 3. The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

But no, we get our Senatorial Elections as demotic turd-chucking contests between ideologue, elitist pigs. All not in the phony millionaires’ club are subjected by compurgation by detestable people like Gloria Allred. An actual, functional Senate that refused to be swayed by the media conglomerates, the corporate interest groups and the soul-dead politicos could not be allowed to continue. Only when this changes will the current decline of our society be arrested. If it doesn’t change, the decline doesn’t stop.

The Senate will get worse, the senators, themselves, will get worse. Eventually this could become bad enough a situation to actually matter. Maybe Alabama Governor Kay Ivy has the testicular fortitude to call this ridiculous dog and pony show of a Senatorial Election. Maybe that could lead us to begin examining whether suboptimal human scum like Mitch McConnell and Gloria Allred should be powerful enough to determine who represents any state in the US Senate other than their own. Perhaps, once our elections become awful enough; people will realize they don’t derive any legitimate power when they cast votes.

Understanding The Constitutional Notion of “Equality”

Monday, November 6th, 2017

The Left is a mob, and mobs are composed of individualists, because they all want to do whatever they want and be protected from the consequences of those actions by being faceless in a crowd. Lower classes with economic mobility, cities and governments all contribute to the formation of crowds, who then act according to herd behavior.

In order to rationalize its behavior, the Left claims to support something called “equality,” which they never really define but interpret to mean that everyone has the same freedoms, minimum economic status and social rank. This is how they expand the crowd: they sell it to others with the promise that removing social hierarchy means they will get the “anarchy with grocery stores” that they crave.

When considering the American Constitution, many point to language by the founders about equality. However, they misinterpret these words because what the founders spoke of was natural equality, which is distinct and opposite to human-enforced equality. Their notion refers to lack of government intervention and not the opposite as the Left argues:

He’s positing on behalf of the Founders a normative equality of persons founded in Christian metaphysics: As persons created in the image of God, we all have inherent dignity and value and are equal as rights possessors regardless of our physical, empirical inequality.

In other words, the founders recognized that we were unequal in ability, and argued only for equality under the law, which to them meant not meritocracy or defense of criminals against their victims, but that no one was excluded from due process and fair treatment in trial.

We can tell why they did this by looking at what was roiling Europe at the time: secret trials, convictions based on the words of an accuser, and exclusion of whole groups — say, Protestants — from being participants in a legal system. In the view of the founders, the point of the Constitution was to limit government from being abusive.

The above quotation comes from an article about the Alt Right that is entirely wrong because it conflates recognizing a genetic basis to behavior with “materialism,” which in this case means thinking that humans make decisions on anything but a blank slate basis. In fact, the opposite is true: only by acknowledging that people operate according to their inclinations, and that very few are conscious, do we understand an escape from materialism, because the blank slate is arguing from the effect, or saying that we are all equal because we all have material bodies, and therefore our choices are entirely based on our intellects and do not reflect our underlying differences in ability, social stature and moral character. Read it if you want an example of clever and well-written but ultimately deceptive reasoning.

For those of us looking to construct the next iteration of Western Civilization, it is important to recognize what the founders did not: equality is a concept that expands to fill all available money, power and time. After all, if people are treated uniformly, and yet results are not uniformly, the inner human monkey will always blame the process. Humans are notorious for playing the victim especially when they are victimizers — one need look only as far as Kevin Spacey’s recent statements explaining his drunken homosexual molestation of a fourteen-year-old — and so, in a democracy, the illusion that the system “created inequality” will always be popular and thus, always win.

Instead, it makes sense to phrase our theory of justice this way: intelligence and moral character are unequal, therefore understanding is relative, and we want to reward those who rise above type, if they are members of the group that created this civilization and will be the only one to successfully inherit it. If a prole does something prole-like, that is not exactly the news, and in fact is the overwhelming normal. However, when someone rises above his heritage, it is important to reward that person and keep an eye on him toward advancing his family line to higher status in the future.

On the other hand, the great American quest for justice by eliminating discrimination has clearly backfired, so even normative equality is a dead concept. There are no blank slates, and people act out their genetic programming based on what they can understand enough to value. However, to make natural selection work for us, we need to take into account what people are — probably through a caste system — and then elevate those who do right while punishing those who do wrong.

Why It Is Time To Replace The Constitution

Tuesday, October 24th, 2017

As we get closer to the breakup of the USA and EU, and their replacement with many smaller nations instead of nation-states, people are looking toward the foundation of our societies. They can choose either rules, or an organic measurement like who we are as people and what cultural values we aspire to. Most on the Right are still befuddled and enamored of rules.

Take for example the American Constitution. Widely-praised, it was designed to avoid the type of government that has occupied the United States for the last seventy years at least. But as some analysis shows, it is not even the same document, when we consider how much its interpretation has changed:

But good government has not been forthcoming lately. This isn’t the Constitution’s fault. Its commands have been disregarded, or reinterpreted, and its operations distorted for so long and to such an extent that it functions as our frame of government much less reliably than you might think. Though still to be reckoned with, the capital-C Constitution yields far too often to the small-c (“living”) constitution, another word for government as usual in Washington, D.C.—that is, government as we have come to know, fear, and resent it since the 1960s.

…Now is the time to think not only about draining the swamp but about keeping it drained, through a wise system of dikes, dams, and pumping stations. To prepare such reforms, perhaps we need a presidential commission to examine all the leading elements of our constitutional dysfunction.

Nietzsche famously said, “There are no truths, only interpretations,” a statement that seems ridiculous until deeply considered. Then it becomes clear that there are no interpretations without interpreters, and so even writing down a complex system of dikes, dams and pumping stations means that newer generations will simply interpret it as is convenient for them.

Since the original days of the Constitution, we changed America from a white-only nation to a mixed-ethnic European nation and finally to a diverse third world nation. We have allowed the courts to chip away at its definitions, giving us new meanings to terms that clearly meant the opposite originally. And we have used it as a battering ram to remove social standards and empower the individual to do just about anything, even the destructive and insane, with society footing the bill.

This would be disturbing, except that it is what happens to every society. Humans have not yet found a society that can resist it, because they all keep doing the same thing, which is trying to design a society to motivate people toward external objectives instead of internal ones. With external objectives, “smart” humans think, you can take mostly-bad people and compel them to be good.

Darwin, Jesus, Buddha and Krishna are here to tell us otherwise: people are born as they are, and they act as they are programmed to do, and they will not deviate, with very few exceptions, because that requires an extraordinary act of will that in turn needs strong force of intellect and force of character. Only a handful can do that, and the rest just act out their program.

The Constitution is dead, and it died of its own assumption that we could shape people into being more than they are. A more sensible view says that we pick the best, let them lead, and others emulate their example and improve themselves as they can, but mostly are kept powerless because their character makes them power abusers.

Shed no tears over the Constitution. It failed long ago. Holding on to it now is to lose the battle by refusing to strategically cede ground. We cannot make every all get along, all be good, and shape them in our image with words alone. Instead, we need to go back to what works, which is looking at the quality of people, implementing hierarchy, and tossing out these silly old pieces of paper.

Conservatism Pulling Away From Patriotism And Christianity

Monday, April 24th, 2017

Conservatism inevitably finds itself in conflict with its only real competition, which is the public form of conservatism. The root of conservatism is anti-social; conservatives recognize that most human ideas are pretense and vaingloriousness, and instead point to time-honored methods of achieving the best results.

In America, conservatives are additionally hampered by the fact of the founding of our nation-state in a modified version of Enlightenment™-era thought: individuals are assumed to be equal, which means that we have no social order like caste or hierarchy of aristocrats.

We bemoan our current state of affairs, but it is hard to see how it would turn out differently. When you begin a nation with the mistaken notion that all people are capable of guiding their own destiny, you end up with mob rule, no matter how many little rules — “checks and balances,” “accountability” — you tack on top.

What nihilists know that everyone else denies is that language has no inherent meaning. Only when two people are both using a word to mean the same thing can the word have shared meaning, and otherwise you have two people talking to themselves and hoping the other can intuit what is being gestured.

“There are no truths, only interpretations,” said a wise man, and this is true in that objects in the world are real, and we have only our impressions of them, which by the nature of our cognition are interpretations of fact patterns. This means that laws, like other facts, become adjusted to fit what the audience can understand, not just in a Dunning-Kruger sense but in all ways.

For this reason, checks and balances fail like other laws: instead of bending to the law, people bend the law and justify it however is convenient and popular. It took only a century and a half for the United States to completely invert the original ideal of its nation, which was an ethnically Western European agrarian nation with English-style social strata and a mostly absent government, and this change provoked the Civil War.

Since those who wanted a liberal-style modern government — also in vogue in Europe at the time — won that war, America successfully obliterated its Constitution and replaced it with a Leftist interpretation of the Constitution that emphasized more the emotional language of the Declaration of Independence than the substance of the law.

Americans talk about freedom, liberty, and independence, but these are surrogates for democracy. They represent the raging ego seeking to deny reality by saying “My intent and choices come first, and reality comes second,” because the smallest indivisible unit of society is now the individual. This leads to self-destruction and misery through social chaos, but the ego cares not about that.

People need guidance and hierarchy. A look at The Bell Curve reveals part of the reason why: most are not gifted with the IQs required to make complex decisions, and too many are given just enough intelligence to feel clever and make those decisions incorrectly. There are a few, maybe 5%, who do all the important thinking, and the rest oppose these because the rest will never understand the best.

Among that group, there are only some qualified to lead, which is a trait of moral character and personality as much as anything else. A leader is able to apply cold logic to filter out the normal human insanity, and to recognize that most people are self-deluding and pretentiously self-aggrandizing without falling into hatred for them. This group is at most 1% of any population.

For this reason, any form of demotism — democracy, equality, consumerism, social popularity — will lead to an inversion of the natural hierarchy such that the rest oppress the best, and this has predictably laughable results which we see around us daily: ugly architecture, garbage mass culture, insubstantial food, moronic leaders, tedious jobs, brain-dead moral interpretations.

Conservatism inherently recognizes this failing. We are realists who want the best qualitative degree of civilization and personal existence possible, and realize how those two are linked. Conservatism has never been pro-democracy, and with the collapse of the United States through the election of an outright Socialist charlatan like Barack Obama, we can now no longer be pro-America.

It is time to take the stars and stripes and set it on fire. Smash down all the American institutions. Blow up the Washington Monument, melt down all the statues, and consign the pitiful ruins of the United States to the dustbin of history. This experiment has failed, and from it we have learned that democracy cannot be successfully limited because it grows like a cancer since it appeals to the inherent self-deceptive tendency of human beings.

Patriotism at this point is the opposite of conservatism. If you become a patriot, you are fighting against conservative ideals like hierarchy, nationalism, moral goodness and transcendental purpose. The United States was not designed a Leftist republic, but ideas are measured not by their starting points or intentions, but what they become in the course of their natural life cycle. Any form of democracy quickly becomes something approximating Communism — roughly what we have now — and so there is no point setting even a toe on that path. It is a path to doom.

In the same way that patriotism has failed us, the idea of theocracy has run out on us too. Most conservatives embrace the mentally laziest path of least resistance, which is to insist that we cuck ourselves by following the “work hard, go to church and have a family” approach which enslaves all of us to paying taxes to our enemies and wasting our days in servitude. Obviously anyone advocating this has missed the point, which is to thwart this empire of death by dropping out of it.

As part of their desire to bond us to the failing regime, conservatives tend to say things like “we must follow the Bible first, and this must guide all that we do.” This destroys political activity by limiting its scope to the individual, which conveniently takes that individual out of circulation so that others can rule him. A more idiotic path would be hard to invent.

Unfortunately, this approach is inherent to the idea of a “personal God” as is found in Christianity. The ancients more correctly depicted the gods as uninterested in our affairs, which made it explicit and clear that we are in the driver’s seat and must save ourselves through cooperation. No amount of personal virtue overcomes a dying regime.

In addition, it is time that we mention the Otherness of Christianity. Although it is mostly Greek ideas — combined with the best of Babylonian, Hindu, Jewish, Nordic and Buddhist thought — Christianity consists of those restated in the personal and emotional methods of the Jewish cantors, instead of the more respectable Talmudic esoteric tradition. For this reason, like democracy, Christianity will always decay into a mass movement and adulterate any meaning into what the Crowd desires.

It does not make sense to, like Nietzsche, blame Christianity for the origin of Leftism. The dirty secret is that Leftism is merely the egoism of the herd, and it is an in-built flaw to humanity, especially among the smarter (but not genius) humans. We love to self-delude and this takes the form not of death-denial but solipsism, which is reality-denial, so that we feel like gods on earth. Crowdism took over Christianity just like it took over the West, by subverting and inverting it, but this means that Christianity is insufficiently resistant.

Part of this lack of resistance is its Otherness. We will always feel like a conquered people when our religion comes from lands other than our own, and when the symbols are not ours, but those of another culture. We obliterate our culture with Christianity by admiring its effectiveness in mobilizing others and forgetting that this means the Crowd will soon rule.

Many of us adore the European Christian traditions we know. We love the old churches, the hymns, the strong moral standards and the love of learning. Many good things happened under Christianity, but this does not mean that they are exclusive to Christianity. We need a new Bible, one that implies more than states rules which can be misinterpreted, that comes from our own lands.

Conservatives have faced a hopeless task for centuries. Leftism is always more popular and just as proportionately more wrong. Retreating to core values like purpose/work, religion and love of nation seems like a good idea, but when those things have been replaced by corrupt ersatz substitutes, this means you conservatives will be working for the enemy. Not a good idea.

I have dreaded writing this essay for years, but it needs to be out there. Reject patriotism and theocracy, and instead, let us look toward a future: we need a government by Us and for Us, and a religion that is the same, and we need to let failed institutions like the Church and Constitution slide into the abyss of failure toward which they will drag us, if we do not step off that treadmill.

Recommended Reading