Category Archives: Liberty

A July Fourth Toast To Thomas Jefferson—And The Anglo-Saxon Tradition

America, Founding Fathers, History, Human Accomplishment, Individual Rights, Liberty, Political Philosophy

“Let us … toast Thomas Jefferson—and the Anglo-Saxon tradition that sired and inspired him.”ILANA MERCER, July 4, 2019

The Declaration of Independence—whose proclamation, on July 4, 1776, we celebrate—has been mocked out of meaning.

To be fair to the liberal Establishment, ordinary Americans are not entirely blameless. For most, Independence Day means firecrackers and cookouts. The Declaration doesn’t feature. In fact, contemporary Americans are less likely to read it now that it is easily available on the Internet, than when it relied on horseback riders for its distribution.

Back in 1776, gallopers carried the Declaration through the country. Printer John Dunlap had worked “through the night” to set the full text on “a handsome folio sheet,” recounts historian David Hackett Fischer in Liberty And Freedom. And President (of the Continental Congress) John Hancock urged that the “people be universally informed.”

Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration, called it “an expression of the American Mind.” An examination of Jefferson‘s constitutional thought makes plain that he would no longer consider the mind of the collective mentality of the D.C. establishment “American” in any meaningful way. For the Jeffersonian mind was that of an avowed Whig—an American Whig whose roots were in the English Whig political philosophy of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

By “all men are created equal,” Jefferson, who also wrote in praise of a “Natural Aristocracy,” did not imply that all men were similarly endowed. Or that they were entitled to healthcare, education, amnesty, and a decent wage, à la Obama.

Rather, Jefferson was affirming the natural right of “all men” to be secure in their enjoyment of their “life, liberty and possessions.”

This is the very philosophy Hillary Clinton explicitly disavowed during one of the mindless presidential debates of 2007. Asked by a YouTubester to define “liberal,” Hillary revealed she knew full-well that the word originally denoted the classical liberalism of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. But she then settled on “progressive” as the appropriate label for her Fabian socialist plank.

Contra Clinton, as David N. Mayer explains in The Constitutional Thought of Thomas Jefferson, colonial Americans were steeped in the writings of English Whigs—John Locke, Algernon Sidney, Paul Rapin, Thomas Gordon and others. The essence of this “pattern of ideas and attitudes,” almost completely lost today, was a view of government as an inherent threat to liberty and the necessity for eternal vigilance.

Jefferson, in particular, was adamant about the imperative “to be watchful of those in power,” a watchfulness another Whig philosopher explained thus: “Considering what sort of Creature Man is, it is scarce possible to put him under too many Restraints, when he is possessed of great Power.”

“As Jefferson saw it,” expounds Mayer, “the Whig, zealously guarding liberty, was suspicious of the use of government power,” and assumed “not only that government power was inherently dangerous to individual liberty but also that, as Jefferson put it, ‘the natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground.’”

For this reason, the philosophy of government that Jefferson articulated in the Declaration radically shifted sovereignty from parliament to the people.

But Jefferson‘s muse for the “American Mind” is even older.

The Whig tradition is undeniably Anglo-Saxon. Our founding fathers’ political philosophy originated with their Saxon forefathers, and the ancient rights guaranteed by the Saxon constitution. With the Declaration, Jefferson told Henry Lee in 1825, he was also protesting England‘s violation of her own ancient tradition of natural rights. As Jefferson saw it, the Colonies were upholding a tradition the Crown had abrogated.

Philosophical purist that he was, moreover, Jefferson considered the Norman Conquest to have tainted this English tradition with the taint of feudalism. “To the Whig historian,” writes Mayer, “the whole of English constitutional history since the Conquest was the story of a perpetual claim kept up by the English nation for a restoration of Saxon laws and the ancient rights guaranteed by those laws.”

If Jefferson begrudged the malign influence of the Normans on the natural law he cherished, imagine how he’d view our contemporary cultural conquistadors from the South, whose customs preclude natural rights and natural reason!

Naturally, Jefferson never entertained the folly that he was of immigrant stock. He considered the English settlers of America courageous conquerors, much like his Saxon forebears, to whom he compared them. To Jefferson, early Americans were the contemporary carriers of the Anglo-Saxon project.

The settlers spilt their own blood “in acquiring lands for their settlement,” he wrote with pride in A Summary View of the Rights of British America. “For themselves they fought, for themselves they conquered, and for themselves alone they have right to hold.” Thus they were “entitled to govern those lands and themselves.”

And, notwithstanding the claims of the multicultural noise machine, the Declaration was as mono-cultural as its author.

Let us, then, toast Thomas Jefferson—and the Anglo-Saxon tradition that sired and inspired him.

©2019 ILANA MERCER
SEE: “A July Fourth Toast To Thomas Jefferson—And The Declaration,” by Ilana Mercer, July 4, 2019

NEW COLUMN: Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond

Argument, Law, libertarianism, Liberty, Logic, Natural Law, Race, Racism, Reason

NEW ON CNSNews.com: “Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond.”

An excerpt: https://tinyurl.com/3j6sdu5z

Racism consists of a mindset or a worldview that boils down to impolite and impolitic thoughts and words written, spoken, preached, or tweeted.

If that’s all racism is, you ask, then what was the knee on George Floyd’s neck? Was that not racism?

No, it was not.

Judging from the known facts, the knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck was a knee on a man’s neck. That’s all that can be inferred from the chilling video recording in which Floyd expired slowly as he pleaded for air.

Floyd begged to breathe. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest.”

There are laws against what transpired between former Officer Derek Chauvin and Mr. Floyd.

And the law’s ambit is not to decide whether the offending officer is a correct-thinking individual, but whether Mr. Chauvin had committed a crime.

About Officer Chauvin’s mindset, the most the law is supposed to divine is mens rea—criminal intention: Was the officer whose knee pressed on Floyd’s neck acting with a guilty mind or not?

For fact-finding is the essence of the law. The law is not an abstract ideal of imagined social justice, that exists to salve sensitive souls.

If “racism” looks like a felony crime, then it ought to be prosecuted as nothing but a crime and debated as such. In the case of Mr. Chauvin, a mindset of depraved indifference seems to jibe with the video.

This is not to refute the reality of racially motivated crimes. These most certainly occur. It is only to refute the legal and ethical validity of a racist mindset in the prosecution of a crime.

Surely, a life taken because of racial or antisemitic animus is not worth more than life lost to spousal battery or to a home invasion.

The law, then, must mete justice, in accordance with the rules of evidence, proportionality and due process. Other than intent, references to the attendant thoughts that accompanied the commission of a crime should be irrelevant—be they racist, sexist, ageist or anti-Semitic.

Ultimately, those thoughts are known only to the perp….

… READ THE REST ON CNSNews.com: “Resist the Left’s Conflation of ‘Racism’ With the Law, for Chauvin and Beyond.”

*Image via CNS.News (Photo credit: Noam Galai/Getty Images)

Vaccine Passports: The End Of American Liberty

Argument, Conservatism, COVID-19, Democrats, IMMIGRATION, Individual Rights, Liberty, Republicans

An invasion of bodily autonomy, one of the most fundamental rights we have.–Glenn Greenwald

How disturbing is it when not even Tucker Carlson frames the extent of the violation that is a vaccine passport in severe enough terms.

While Tucker did “call the idea ‘Orwellian,’ [he] asked Glenn Greenwald if he felt like the idea would work to convince more Americans to get the vaccination.”

Utilitarianism is common among the punditry: judge a policy by its aggregate positive outcomes, and not by whether it is just or unjust, violates rights or not.

Sean Hannity reduced the vaccine compulsion to privacy: a matter between a doctor and his patient. This is better than utilitarianism, for at least Hannity pinpointed an individual right.

However, only journalist Glenn Greenwald said what needs saying (this daily Caller report is not good; some of the stuff “reported” or inferred was not said or meant, although this next was):

“Well, I think you have to start with noting how draconian of an invasion this is in three different ways,” Greenwald said. “Number one, coercing citizens to put a substance into their body that they don’t want in their body, a pretty grave invasion of bodily autonomy, one of the most fundamental rights we have. Secondly, gathering a new database that can track people in terms of their health, that can easily be expanded as government programs often do into a whole variety of other uses, and then thirdly, you are restricting people’s movement. Freedom of movement is one of the most fundamental rights we have. It’s actually guaranteed in the Constitution.  …

Herd immunity will be arrived at eventually.

“Why is it necessary to stigmatize [those choosing not to vaccinate] and create a caste system?” Greenwald asked. ”

Typically, Sen. John Kennedy, with his contrived Southern act (he’s Ivy League) and rehearsed, overwrought cracks, puts Trump’s party back decades. On March 9, 2021, he told “Fox News Primetime” host Trey Gowdy that Americans love the 1 million legal immigrants coming in annually, and object ONLY to illegal, Biden-created chaos on border.

On vaccine passport, Kennedy “shone” just as brightly. Hannity, who treats his mostly friendly guests as family members, was expecting an erudite objection from Kennedy about the coerced-vaccine plan. The senator representing Louisiana needs to rehearse to disgorge his faux Southern witticisms. Thus was he caught unawares by Hannity, a generally fawning interviewer.

To the question about vaccine passports, Kennedy the cretin replied with a non sequitur:

A vaccine passport would be “terribly unethical,” croaked Kennedy, and not because it would threaten an individual’s dominion over his body, but because “EVERYBODY DOES NOT YET HAVE ACCESS TO THE VACCINE.”

 

UPDATED III (3/31/021): The Developing Orwellian Covid Terminology. Will Vaccine Resisters Be WACOed?

Argument, Canada, COVID-19, Critique, Healthcare, Liberty, Nationalism, Politics, Propaganda

The “vaccine hesitancy” pejorative is an attempt to demonize clear thinking and reasoning.

Apropos the COVID-19 vaccine: Not one TV ego in an anchor’s chair has had the intelligence to ask about longitudinal studies.

The creation of a vaccine involves scientists and medical experts from around the world, and it usually requires 10 to 15 years of research before the vaccine is made available to the general public. [HERE]

There are none! The Covid vaccines are just too new; they were rushed to market. I’m all for well-tested vaccines. (Especially when liability is attached to the manufacturers. This is not the case with Covid-vaccine manufacturers.)

Then there is the Covid variants saga. It is clear to anyone with a critical mind thinks Covid vaccines will go the way of the flu vaccines: An annual affair if one chooses to make it so, because of the natural mutation these clever RNA strands undergo.

Personally, I’ve never taken the flu vaccine. My doctor concurs: The flu shots aren’t very effective.

UPDATE I (3/29/021): Logically, the COVID vaccine is likely to be an annual affair.

Who predicted that, above, on ? The same person who urged you to wear the N95 mask, on 3/5/020, when St. Fauci was cautioning you against protecting your life with a mask (for which that man should stand in the dock).

The planet could have a year or less before first-generation Covid-19 vaccines are ineffective and modified formulations are needed, according to a survey of epidemiologists, virologists and infectious disease specialists. …

Instead of listening to America’s crooked medical talking-head imbeciles, all clawing their way to becoming part of the Biden—or, before that Trump’s—task force—or consultants to the corporate media—here is an aggregated opinion:

The grim forecast of a year or less comes from two-thirds of respondents, according to the People’s Vaccine Alliance, a coalition of organisations including Amnesty International, Oxfam, and UNAIDS, who carried out the survey of 77 scientists from 28 countries. Nearly one-third of the respondents indicated that the time-frame was likely nine months or less.

…“New mutations arise every day. Sometimes they find a niche that makes them more fit than their predecessors. These lucky variants could transmit more efficiently and potentially evade immune responses to previous strains,” said Gregg Gonsalves, associate professor of epidemiology at Yale University, in a statement.

For the evolutionary advantage—mutation—of a clever little RNA coil the experts blame the “vaccine hesitancy” of the population at large. Or, global, systemic racism: Not enough sharing by the developed world.

We vaccinate every year for the flu because of mutations, don’t we? Why would the clever SARS-CoV-2 be less efficient?

MORE:New Covid vaccines needed globally within a year, say scientists.”

UPDATE II (3/31/021): Strokes.

Correlation is not causation, but a person I love dearly had a stroke a few weeks after the vaccine. The individual was NOT AT RISK FOR A STROKE. WTF!

Trace Alex Berenson’s Socratic questions about the correlation of all the new, messenger-RNA technology vaccinations to strokes:

https://mobile.twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1376911443367501828

UPDATE III: Will They WACO Vaccine Resisters?

As surmised in this space, the Covid vaccines last as long as the virus’s next mutation.

Israel’s Netanyahoo, however, has floated the freaky idea of a six-monthly vaccine schedule:

“The vaccines we have, no one knows how long they last…We need to prepare for the worst scenario. The worst scenario is that we have to vaccinate every half year.”

Do they plan to intern or force the stuff into the resister community’s veins? Upon arriving in Canada, the newly arrived must submit to being corralled into a government-designated “hotel.” There is an exorbitant shakedown fee, too. The policy was instituted by Justin Trudeau, who is both despicable as he is deeply stupid.

Could they WACO resisters? Will WACO now become a verb? Oh, I forget: the kids don’t learn history, ancient or recent. It might teach them something.