The following is an email from "WD," a contributor to a small group I correspond with. He has given me permission to post it here. It is a constructive critique of the "Oath Keepers principles" we linked to the other day.
One of the aspects of our national and cultural institutions that troubles me is the shallowness of our shared social compact. The DOI principles elicited are not adequate to define the unique nature of our political and governing institutions which combine a multi-tiered republican social compact, the principles of British constitutionalism and the underpinnings of Natural Law (“Ordained by their Creator…”).
The fundamental problem in our country today is that no-one has a common [shared] sense of what undergirds the DOI principles, therefore, everyone is free to ‘interpret’ them as they see fit – including justification for the tyranny of simple majority rule (direct or representative). County counsel shut down your business - it is legal. State seize your property for failure to pay ever-increasing property taxes – it is legal. Federal BLM administrative rules change such that you cannot ranch on land you’ve held for three generations – times have changed. Your property needed for a World Biosphere or new city greenway or that big supporter property developer’s new project – oh well, should have thought of that when you voted for the losers last election.
The fundamental problem in our country today is that no-one has a common [shared] sense of what undergirds the DOI principles, therefore, everyone is free to ‘interpret’ them as they see fit – including justification for the tyranny of simple majority rule (direct or representative). County counsel shut down your business - it is legal. State seize your property for failure to pay ever-increasing property taxes – it is legal. Federal BLM administrative rules change such that you cannot ranch on land you’ve held for three generations – times have changed. Your property needed for a World Biosphere or new city greenway or that big supporter property developer’s new project – oh well, should have thought of that when you voted for the losers last election.
There are limits; limits prescribed by natural law.
This idea is missing…
Else, our adherence to the tired shibboleths of the 2nd Amendment, in the face of massive public opposition and “reasonable restrictions and compromises” becomes nothing but outworn obstinacy in the face of manifest, majority “consent of the governed”…Mike Vanderboegh has more thought-provoking commentary springing from these correspondences.
There are limits; limits prescribed by natural law.
This idea is missing…
Else, our adherence to the tired shibboleths of the 2nd Amendment, in the face of massive public opposition and “reasonable restrictions and compromises” becomes nothing but outworn obstinacy in the face of manifest, majority “consent of the governed”…Mike Vanderboegh has more thought-provoking commentary springing from these correspondences.