Watch ‘Destroying Modern Democracy In America’ on Rumble and YouTube.
We must become fully energize in destroying modern democracy in America. That is ‘democracy’ as it is used by those who manipulate the idea of the original intent in meaning. I am personally outraged and tired of anyone, including so called conservative and any Republican, using ‘democracy’ outside of its foundational context. Because the educational system is corrupted, we have lost the truth of that foundational context.
This lost truth is not new. In his letter to Thomas Jefferson dated December 25, 1813, John Adams was already turning from Orthodox Christianity to Unitarianism. But unlike the total depravity of modern Unitarians, Adams had high regard for the impact and importance of Fundamental Christianity in every aspect of American society and politics. Adams wrote: (my emphasis added)
Zaleuct,s, the legislator of Locris, and Charondas of Sybaris, were disciples of Pythagoras, and both celebrated to immortality for the wisdom of their laws, five hundred years before Christ. Why are those laws lost? I say, the spirit of party has destroyed them ; civil, political, and ecclesiastical bigotry. Despotical, monarchical, aristocratical, and democratical fury, have all been employed in this work of destruction of every thing that could give us true light, and a clear insight of antiquity. For every one of these parties, when possessed of power, or when they have been undermost, and struggling to get uppermost, has been equally prone to every species of fraud and violence and usurpation. Why has not Priestley mentioned these legislators? The preamble to the laws of Zaleucus, which is all that remains, is as orthodox Christian theology as Priestley’s, and Christian benevolence and forgiveness of injuries almost as clearly expressed.’
Oops, like myself, I wonder if you recognize the inference to Christian Nationalism in the last sentence?
18th Century Meaning of Democracy
To begin destroying democracy of the modern era we must understand the Foundational meaning and application. What I want you to do is to go to the Webster’s 1828 Dictionary and look up democracy and its derivatives.
Seriously Interested in Destroying Modern Democracy?
If you are seriously interested in destroying Modern democracy in America, you should be willing to read these noted pages in Volume I of the Workss of John Adams:
Time for each person to be responsible for understanding modern democracy as the,
We go on as usual, congress resolving one thing, and the democratical societies resolving the contrary; the President doing what is right, and clubs and mobs resolving it to be all wrong.’
Neither by birth, education, taste nor habits of life entertaining faith in theoretical democracy, his later observation had only confirmed his profound distrust of every thing which savored of the profession of it. His honorable and successful labors to effect the establishment of the federal constitution, were guided not so much by his confidence in the intrinsic excellence of that instrument, as by his anxiety to escape the danger of something worse. And his confidence in the permanency of that, never great, had been seriously impaired by the trials to which it had been subjected, and by the visible accumulation of elements regarded by him as sooner or later threatening its subversion.’
From ‘A government of Laws and Not of Men’ –
‘Adams described the British constitution as a limited monarchy, or one that brought monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy into balance. These three ranks were then divided into two “grand divisions” of power – executive and legislative. At this early stage, Adams had not yet fully developed his ideas of the judiciary as a separate division of power, and while he clearly still recognized its importance, he still viewed it as part of the executive.’
The major concept for our Constitutional Republic is what Sam Adams and Thomas Jefferson termed ‘Democratic Republicanism.’
To destroy modern democracy in America, we must return to all the mechanisms and principles of Democratic Republicanism. To do this, we must once again force the educational system to teach our history and principles of governing through truth.
To Benjamin Kent, 1776:
‘New Govts are now erecting in the several American States under the Authority of the people. Monarchy seems to be generally exploded. And it is not surprising to me, that the Aristocratick Spirit which appeard to have taken deep Root in some of them, now gives place to that of Democracy, You justly observe that “the Soul or Spirit of Democracy is VIRTUE.” No State can long preserve its Liberty “where Virtue is not supremely honord.”
To Thomas Jefferson, 1801:
‘I congratulate you on the return of Peace. The War both in America and Europe was designed by Tyrant Kings to exterminate those rights and liberties which the Gracious Creator has granted to Man, and to sink the happiness resulting therefrom in ruin and oblivion.—Is there not, my friend, reason to believe, that the principles of Democratic Republicanism are already better understood than they were before; and that by the continued efforts of Men of Science and Virtue, they will extend more and more till the turbulent and destructive Spirit of War shall cease?—The proud oppressors over the Earth shall be totally broken down and those classes of Men who have hitherto been the victims of their rage and cruelty shall perpetually enjoy perfect Peace and Safety till time shall be no more.’
Lastly from the Anti-federalist Montezuma, 1787
‘We the Aristocratic party of the United States, lamenting the many inconveniences to which the late confederation subjected the well-born, the better kind of people, bringing them down to the level of the rabble—and holding in utter detestation that frontispiece to every bill of rights, that all men are born equal—beg leave (for the purpose of drawing a line between such as we think were ordained to govern, and such as were made to bear the weight of government without having any share in its administration) to submit to our Friends in the first class for their inspection, the following defense of our monarchical, aristocratical democracy.
lst. As a majority of all societies consist of men who (though totally incapable of thinking or acting in governmental matters) are more readily led than driven, we have thought meet to indulge them in something like a democracy in the new constitution, which part we have designated by the popular name of the House of Representatives. But to guard against every possible danger from this lower house, we have subjected every bill they bring forward, to the double negative of our upper house and president. Nor have we allowed the populace the right to elect their representatives annually … lest this body should be too much under the influence and control of their constituents, and thereby prove the “weatherboard of our grand edifice, to show the shiftings of every fashionable gale,”—for we have not yet to learn that little else is wanting to aristocratize the most democratical representative than to make him somewhat independent of his political creators.‘
Embedded in the posting.
You have enough to read from others. I don’t want to burden you with what I would suggest.