Offsite Post: ‘Putting Trump’s Conviction in Historical Perspective’

 

For many conservatives in the United States and some abroad, the reaction to Donald Trump’s conviction in NYC has been some variant of the phrase, ‘This is unprecedented in US history.’  To which we must reply that this simply is not the case.

But citizens of the States are notoriously illiterate of history.  There is a reason for this, which we will touch on later.  But for the moment it is necessary to recite some of the precedents in US history for the weaponized court conviction of Donald Trump.

First up is the Whiskey Rebellion, which occurred in western Pennsylvania.  It was more or less a replay of the colonists’ rebellion against the British tax on tea, except this time it was small farmers and producers rebelling against a federal tax on whiskey, implemented in 1791.

Pres. Jefferson helped repeal the hated taxes in 1802, but the hypocrisy of the whole affair is palpable:  The very people who used a tea tax to agitate a war for independence from Great Britain were quick to squelch a similar maneuver from being used by the poor working-class folk of western Pennsylvania via the new federal government’s overwhelming military force.  That was an ominous beginning for the plain folk of the States (i.e., the same type of people who are now ardent Trump supporters, who are facing the same type of punitive measures by their elite) under their new federal constitution, written and ratified just a few years earlier in 1787-8.  But more disturbing actions were to come. 

The Alien and Sedition Acts were passed during the Adams administration in 1798, and bear an incredibly strong resemblance to what Mr. Trump is undergoing in NYC.  Under these Acts, criticism of the federal government became a treasonous crime that could be punished by fines or a jail sentence.  Benjamin Franklin’s grandson was charged under the act, dying before his trial, but the case of Rep. Matthew Lyon is so similar to Mr. Trump’s that it deserves special notice:

A sitting member of Congress even found himself caught up in the web spun by the Sedition Act. Matthew Lyon represented Vermont in Congress and also served as the editor of the Republican paper The Scourge of Aristocracy. During his re-election campaign, Lyon wrote a reply to his Federalist opponents, accusing President Adams of engaging in a “continual grasp for power” and of having “an unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice.” He also blasted the president for using religion to drum up war against France, writing he could not support the executive, “when I shall see the sacred name of religion employed as a state engine to make mankind hate.”

 

Lyon was indicted on sedition charges on Oct. 5, 1798, and arrested the next day. A federal judge fined Lyon $1,000 and sentenced him to four months in prison. (4) He served time in a 16′ x 12′ cell used for felons, counterfeiters, thieves, and runaway slaves. Judge William Paterson – an avid nationalist and supporter of the Federalist Party – lamented the fact he couldn’t impose a harsher sentence.

 

Lyon won reelection while in jail by a landslide.

Will Trump also win re-election ‘by a landslide?’  Leftists ought to pause to reflect on what their actions may bring about.

Nevertheless, the Alien and Sedition Acts also expired under Jefferson’s administration.  One might think by these acts that Jefferson’s years as president would be bright with the light of liberty, but he also abused federal power.  His embargo measures during the Napoleonic wars in Europe were a cause of much hardship in New England, bringing the commerce of her great shipping fleet to a standstill.  State governments rebelled, refusing to cooperate with federal officials tasked with enforcing them, and smuggling became widespread (full details are provided in J. J. Kilpatrick’s The Sovereign States).

These embargo acts would eventually be repealed, but other federal embargo laws would continue to stir up strife in New England through the War of 1812, culminating in the pro-secession Hartford Convention of 1814.

It is telling that callous, repressive measures by the political elite were committed even by Pres. Jefferson, one of the presidents most friendly towards the ideals of the Enlightenment/classical liberalism.  This makes the actions of Pres. Lincoln, who was the opposite of Mr. Jefferson – a Cromwellian figure, in fact, per Prof. Mel Bradford – all the more predictable.  Pres. Lincoln launched a war to prevent peaceful Southern secession (the falsely named ‘Civil War’ of 1861-5), and his actions during that war are amongst some of the worst by a government of the US against its citizens.  Some of the most egregious include the jailing of upwards of 30,000 citizens of the Northern States, deporting Ohio’s Rep. Vallandigham for opposing an income tax, silencing hundreds of newspapers, and intimidating voters.

Other notable parts of this pattern of precedents include the violent, corrupt federal Reconstruction of the South, which followed the War; the assassination of Pres. Kennedy (1963), likely at the behest of his Vice President Lyndon Johnson, among other characters; and the Ruby Ridge killings by the FBI (1992).

What conservatives saw in a NYC courtroom on May 30^th, 2024, shouldn’t have startled them so badly.  Things equally bad, and things much worse, have been done by their governmental elite in the past.  But, as we noted above, the historical amnesia of the peoples of the States precludes this.  And the cause of this forgetfulness transcends in importance the foolish and immoral acts of this or that administration or official.

That cause is the very thing upon which they pride themselves so highly:  American exceptionalism.  The freedom of the individual to chart his own destiny (the main aspect of American exceptionalism) necessarily means the severing of ties to the past and ties to community – for one to truly become ‘anything he wants to be,’ all restraints must be removed, however benevolent they may seem, including the most basic duties to one’s religion, family and neighborhood, history, class, culture, and even one’s own sex.

This hyper-individualism of theirs also leaves them vulnerable to the thing they dread the most:  a tyrannical, lawless government.  . . .

The rest is at https://identitydixie.com/2024/06/15/putting-trumps-conviction-in-historical-perspective/.

Thanks to Michael Hoffman for pointing out the importance of the Whiskey Rebellion in his writings.

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!

Offsite Post: ‘States Shouldn’t Kowtow to Racially-Gerrymandering Courts’

 

The Louisiana Legislature’s first session of 2024 will begin on Monday, 15 January, to deal in large part with a federal court’s order to create a second majority-minority federal congressional district.  It should be a quick session; the Legislature should simply refuse to comply.

They have solid justification for doing so.  First, the federal constitution gives plenary power over congressional elections to the State legislatures and to the federal legislature:

‘The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators (Article I, Sec. 4).’

The federal courts are good at twisting words and phrases, but not even they can insinuate themselves into those lines.

Second, federal civil rights legislation doesn’t require it.  Justice Clarence Thomas is downright blunt in his dissenting opinion in Allen v Milligan (2023):

 

In enacting the original Voting Rights Act in 1965, Congress copied this definition almost verbatim from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1960—a law designed to protect access to the ballot in jurisdictions with patterns or practices of denying such access based on race, and which can-not be construed to authorize so-called vote-dilution claims. See 74 Stat. 91–92 (codified in relevant part at 52 U. S. C. §10101(e)). Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which cross-referenced the 1960 Act’s definition of “vote,” likewise protects ballot access alone and cannot be read to address vote dilution. See 78 Stat. 241 (codified in relevant part at 52 U. S. C. §10101(a)). Tellingly, the 1964 Act also used the words “standard, practice, or procedure” to refer specifically to voting qualifications for individuals and the actions of state and local officials in administering such require-ments.1 Our entire enterprise of applying §2 to districting rests on systematic neglect of these statutory antecedents and, more broadly, of the ballot-access focus of the 1960s’ voting-rights struggles. . . .

 

In any event, stare decisis should be no barrier to reconsidering a line of cases that “was based on a flawed method of statutory construction from its inception,” has proved in-capable of principled application after nearly four decades of experience, and puts federal courts in the business of “methodically carving the country into racially designated electoral districts.” Holder, 512 U. S., at 945 (opinion of THOMAS, J.). This Court has “never applied stare decisis mechanically to prohibit overruling our earlier decisions determining the meaning of statutes,” and it should not do so here. Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs., 436 U. S. 658, 695 (1978). Stare decisis did not save “separate but equal,” despite its repeated reaffirmation in this Court and the pervasive reliance States had placed upon it for decades. See, e.g., Brief for Appellees in Brown v. Board of Education, O. T. 1953, No. 1, pp. 18–30. It should not rescue modern-day forms of de jure racial balkanization—which, as these cases show, is exactly where our §2 vote-dilution jurisprudence has led.

Third, any action of the federal government that violates the US constitution (such as the court order being discussed) is void, of no effect, and the proper response of States is to nullify such acts.  The Louisiana Legislature ringingly endorsed that view in SCR 21 last year.  They should follow through and veto these unconstitutional federal orders to racially gerrymander, rather than sheepishly comply.  If they don’t, they will reveal themselves to be hypocrites, saying one thing and then doing another.

Fourth, even the pro-centralizing Federalist Papers (the same documents that promised the federal courts would be the ‘weakest’ federal branch, having ‘judgment’ but not ‘force’ or ‘will’ – a promise we should insist be fulfilled), even they suggest that States ought not comply with unlawful federal measures, and then go on to recommend ways they can neutralize them.  Via the Tenth Amendment Center:

 . . .

The rest is at https://thehayride.com/2024/01/garlington-states-shouldnt-kowtow-to-racially-gerrymandering-courts/.

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!

Offsite Post: ‘“Ferris Bueller’s Day Off” Captures the Essence of Americanism’

 

Art, as they say, is a mirror, and the saying holds true for the 1986 pop-culture ‘classic’ movie Ferris Bueller’s Day Off.  Its characters and plotlines reveal the essence of modern America with remarkable clarity.

Ferris Bueller, the teenage boy at the center of the movie, is the quintessential modern American:  determined to ‘pursue happiness’ (Declaration of Independence), he has no problem ignoring all rules and authorities to obtain it:  skipping school, deceiving parents, etc.  This plays out geopolitically with the US ignoring and/or undermining international treaties, moral traditions of other countries, the rules of warfare, and so on to obtain whatever they are after.

Authority figures in the film are portrayed as either hopelessly naïve and irrelevant (like Ferris’s parents, who believe his performance that he is ill so he can stay home from school) or utterly tyrannical (like Ed Rooney, the dean of Ferris’s school who is determined to catch Ferris in a lie and punish him).  This is also very much akin to the US view of political authority:  There are only those two options:  Political authorities are either wicked, uncontrollable tyrants or toothless puppets of the people (autocracy vs. democracy, in Pres. Biden’s terminology).

Ferris’s best friend Cameron, who is dragged into the action by Ferris, is another illustration of the US attitude toward authority.  Deathly afraid at the start that his father will find out that his prized Ferrari was driven about town by he, Ferris, and Sloane (Ferris’s girlfriend), by the end of the movie he has been transformed into the typical rebellious American who is ready to confront and win his independence from any kind of restraining force.  It’s 1776 within the family, and it is glorious!

Jeannie, Ferris’s sister who is angry that he never gets in trouble for his constant rule-breaking, symbolizes virtue, morality, and conscience.  It is remarkable that she is corrupted by the end of the movie (after some advice at the jail from a drug addict, another American man ‘pursuing happiness’), as she comes to Ferris’s aid just as Rooney is about to expose his lie that he has been sick all day.  And this is presented in the film as a praiseworthy change that we should cheer!  The charade of modern America’s morality is thus stripped away:  Virtue for the US is the ability to smugly flout whatever rules they wish, and to enjoy doing so by strangling the cry of conscience.

Is it any wonder that, more and more, countries in the world with even a shred of traditional religious sensibility are beginning to question their friendship with the United States?

How can the US create close ties with them again?  With stacks of cash?  That might work on a few, and for a time, but certainly not with most of them, or for very long.

What is necessary is a transformation of the peoples of the US and their government, a step back into their more traditional past.  Prior to their war for independence in 1776, the 13 colonies that later became the United States were basically extensions of European Christendom in North America.  After that war, the new States became post-Christian – not all at once, it is a process that has been ongoing, though there have moments that accelerated it such as the Northern Yankee Revolution of 1861-5 and the CIA-driven cultural revolution of the 1960s.  Nevertheless, 1776 is the dividing line, after which the States exchanged Christianity (in the attenuated forms in which they knew it) for an idolatrous worship of Liberty.

In order to regain the trust and friendship of the more traditional countries of the world that they are alienating – with the Global South, i.e., by far the greatest proportion of the world’s population, the United States will have to rediscover and nurture anew their Christian roots.  . . .

The rest may be read here:

https://www.geopolitika.ru/en/article/ferris-buellers-day-captures-essence-americanism

Or here:

https://katehon.com/en/article/ferris-buellers-day-captures-essence-americanism

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!

‘Mayor Ellis Disappoints with Pride Month Celebrations’

 

LGBT Pride Month is coming to Monroe in a big way.  Celebrations are planned for 24 June at the Louisiana Purchase Gardens & Zoo and for 29 June at the Monroe Civic Center Arena.  These dates are significant for Christians:  June 24^th is the Nativity of St. John the Baptist; June 29^th is the feast day commemorating the martyrdom of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.  But Satan loves to desecrate whatever is holy.  Unless the leadership of the City of Monroe change their mind, the devil will succeed in that later this month.

We encourage everyone to say extra prayers for Monroe and her leaders and for all of Ouachita Parish – so we will see repentance and an end to these sorts of evils (the Akathist Hymn to the Mother of God, Softener of Evil Hearts, would be fitting for this situation), the honoring of the Holy Trinity and his saints, and the protection of the innocence of our children and the sacredness of the family.  Folks who are unhappy about these Pride events should contact Mayor Friday Ellis and ask him to cancel them (the phone number for the Mayor’s Office is (318) 329-2310).

If promoting the LGBT religion is the price that must be paid by Monroe and Ouachita Parish to have big corporations like Lumen and Amazon present here, that price is too high.  We must ask them to leave if they insist on pushing such things upon us.  The souls and bodies of our people are not for sale; our duty is to unite all of them who are willing to Christ, Who loves them and gave His life for them.  And He Who is the Creator of the cosmos from nothingness will likewise help us to provide whatever is needed for ourselves, our families, and our neighbors, as He has promised us in the Holy Gospels (St. Matthew 6:31-33), if only we will be faithful to Him and trust in Him.

Originally appeared at this site:

https://thehayride.com/2024/06/garlington-mayor-ellis-disappoints-with-pride-month-celebrations/

--

Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!

Anathema to the Union!