Earlier this month, when I read on an alternative Internet media source very shortly after it had occurred, that Canada's Prime Minister Harper had suspended the Canadian Parliament, I thought, "Wow! This is monumental! This is unprecedented in the history of the past two centuries of the development of modern Democracies in the West!" It is tantamount to the President of our USA sending the Congress home while he took control of the government to deal with whatever issues were imminent and--"That ain't right!"
To me, individually, it should have been the talk of the town and the word on the street--perhaps I expect too much of people--it should have been the biggest front page headline in a long while and the discussion of the mainstream media for at least that day and well beyond! Canada is the closest thing to a "blood brother" that America has! We share a continent; we speak English (except for the French Canadian minority--and hey, they've made sufficient and equitable allowance for them too); we were originally established as White Anglo-Saxon Protestant nations; we have Democracies--the only difference being we severed our ties with the English monarchy entirely and Canada did not, entirely, and so it has a Parliamentarian Democracy with provisional entanglements with the English monarchy still...
...but just the fact that it has a Parliamentarian form of Democracy says a lot in that all of the many parties reached a coalition agreement that could have brought down upon Prime Minister Harper a vote of "no confidence" and he'd have been sacked over, more or less, the disapproval of the representatives of the voting citizenry of his handling of the current global "economic crisis/noncrisis"! Unfortunately, he had the recourse of running to the Queen's skirts and begging a suspension of the Parliament for seven weeks so he could "do his thing" to work out the problems of the current economic disarray...
...so one could truthfully and honestly say that our "Democratic" neighbor/blood brother to the North currently has a temporary "dictator"! What worries me is that, given the historical record, how many "dictators" have attained unto this position and then relinquished it!?! Now I know that the situation will probably stabilize and Canada will return to its former state--but given the historical record you can see my cause for concern...
...and what worries me even more is the fact that if it could happen in Canada it could happen here in America! All it would take would be a sufficient degree of "crisis" for our President to declare a state of national emergency, declare martial law and suspend the Congress--unConstitutional?--of course!--but in our slumbering we have allowed our American form of Democracy, defined solely upon the basis of a legal document called "The Constitution," to be trampled upon and ignored and skirted around so that the Constitutional limits of the Federal government have been way out of bounds (i.e. "illegal") for so long that I doubt that anyone would even care let alone realize it--American Federal government has been illegal [as defined by the Constitution] for so long that the very small minority who realize this now seem powerless to reverse the trend; given the current ignorant state of the seeming slumbering majority of the citizenry...
...and now on the heels of recent events in Canada we are confronted with the reality of the nearness of a Constitutional Convention being convened! According to the Constitution, if two-thirds of the individual States of our Union petition for the convening of a Constitutional Convention it has to occur--that would be 34 out of 50 individual States--we're currently at 32 and if Ohio had voted last week instead of postponing said vote we could have been only one State away--two States away is already too close for comfort for me...
...some States, like Wyoming, have officially "rescinded"--attempted to retract; withdraw their request--but technically the Constitution makes no provisions for such a retraction after-the-fact...
...once convened, a Constitutional Convention would be wide-open. The Constitution places no limitations on the changes it could enact...
...with the "Social Progressives" no doubt staged and well in place and poised to take full advantage of such, who could predict the outcome--other than the inevitability that The Constitution and the Bill of Rights would no longer be what it once was...
...what do I hope to gain from attempting to inform others of the nearness of this perhaps radical impending change--only the right to exist within my own personal belief system--The Constitution, as it currently stands, allows me this--altered; perhaps not...
...but with the reality of a Constitutional Convention looming it's time to get politically active--to elect representatives to our individual State governments who represent the will of the citizenry who put them into office and to hold on to a hope and a prayer that they will sincerely represent the will of the silent majority, the constituency that put them into office as the representative of their will...
...and after all, what is the relevance of a legal document such as The Constitution given the fact that it is well over two centuries old!?! Well, in order to understand this we must first be able to understand the division that occurs between Human Nature and Technological Advancement. We consider ourselves to be more advanced, sophisticated and superior to previous generations because of our Technological Advancement--but our Human Nature has not changed over the Ages--as Thoreau astutely observed, the advance of technology is merely an improved Means towards an unimproved End...
...the Founding Fathers who drafted our Constitution attempted to compose a legal document that would prevent the oppressions and exploitations that had been demonstrated historically according to mankinds' Human Nature--just because we are today more technologically advanced does not mean that we are no longer capable of such oppressions and exploitations according to our Human Nature--in fact, it would suggest that we are even more capable of exacting oppressions and exploitations via our Technological Advancements according to our Human Nature...
...in this sense, The Constitution is quite wise and timeless--almost flawless--but should we contemplate the claim of it's outdatedness or the fact that the Conspirator's claim to have placed the seeds of its own demise within it from its inception--perhaps this was the potential of the Constitutional Convention...
©2008 Michael, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Saturday, December 20, 2008
Last modified: Saturday, December 20, 2008
The views expressed in this article are those of Michael only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Michael is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Michael of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By Michael |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: Jahfre Fire Eater
Date: 2008-12-21 08:17:15
Hi Michael,
Nice article. Change will certainly happen, you're absolutely right. When some parts of a government fear other parts of a government the people are still irrelevant. When parts of the government begin to fear the people, the country is once again on the right track but there will be hell to pay.
Wouldn't it be interesting if the citizens of the USA eventually revolt to reinstate the current Constitution after a new Constitutional Convention creates a "legal" form of oppression and slavery to the State? That may actually be the shortest way to recovery...Time will tell.
-Jahfre Fire Eater
Posted By: David S
Date: 2008-12-21 12:18:12
Michael you have voiced my fears exactly. BTW I have a friend in Canada. He is very intelligent and well educated and I have the utmost respect for him. When I asked him what he though about Harper's suspension of parliament this is what he said:
"We are mild mannered Canadians who know it will all work out in the end."
I was somewhat shocked at the answer. And it makes me wonder how the bulk of Americans would react if the president suspended congress. I'd like to think that all Americans would get their guns, pitchforks, baseball bats, golf clubs and whatever else they have and go to DC to throw out the scoundrel. God help us if they take the approach of my Canadian friend. But the American people have become so dumbed down about the constitution that they might well just sit there and say duh what's on TV tonight? Our fellow Americans not only don't know we're losing our constitutional republic, but they never knew we had one in the first place!
Posted By: Bill Walker
Date: 2008-12-21 14:11:05
Before you make a comment about an Article V Convention, you should get your facts correct. The public record, which you can read only at the www.foavc.org website, where we've gathered for the first time in history, the actual texts of the applications by presenting photgraphic copies of the actual government records shows that all 50 states have submitted over 650 applications for an AVC.
Now I'm not going to dwell on the fact that as a sufficent number of states have applied, your fear about a dictatorship in the United States has already happened. It has happened not because a convention was called but because Congress and the rest of the government has taken the position it can veto the Constitution and not call a convention. The government knows groups and people like you have set up a fear in the people to use the Constitution and its power of a convention to prevent the veto of the Constitution and its taken full advantage of it.
Go to www.foavc.org and read the actual texts of the applications. Read about the federal lawsuits where the government admitted it must call but also admits by not doing so it is in violation of federal criminal law. This admission was before the Supreme Court by the way.
Read about a convention. Learn the true facts. We use actual verifiable references at FOAVC not half truths and unsupported assertions.
Oh by the way, please name anyone who has advocated what you suggest and ask yourself this question: if someone did try as you suggest, do you really think everyone, especially those in power, would just sit by and let it happen?
Like I said, go to www.foavc.org and learn the truth. Then write an accurate, factual article. Maybe someone will actually believe you.
Posted By: David S
Date: 2008-12-22 13:11:06
Bill why are you going into attack mode? Most readers of this forum are staunch supporters of the constitution. Many of us believe a constitutional convention could lead to the destruction of the constitution. As I read your website you believe a convention could restore our constitution. But I don't see an explanation of how that would come about. If you can explain that to us we might be on your side.
Posted By: Michael
Date: 2008-12-22 21:12:56
Patriot Bill,
Thank you for informing me of “the other half” of the story. I was not aware that there were patriots of the Constitution out there who supported a Constitutional Convention in order to reaffirm and reestablish the Constitution as it was originally intended by its Framers. You and your organization decidedly have a genuine and authentic historical grievance [exquisitely documented in detail at your website] against the Federal government for denying the citizens of the USA many times over in the past the Constitutional right to an Article V convention–it was indeed “illegal” for this to have happened historically...
...I suppose this divides us into two separate camps, working for the same cause, then; those patriots who think a current Constitutional Convention would be a good thing to insure the future liberty of our citizens by reaffirming the Constitution as it was originally intended and those patriots who think a current Constitutional Convention would be a bad thing for such...
...the 650 plus historical applications for an AVC are now, unfortunately and regrettably, “water under the bridge”–unConstitutional; YES!–“illegal;” YES!–but nonetheless, water under the bridge...
...it is the current aspect of a Constitutional Convention, not the past chances where we were historically denied them, that concerns me for, let’s just say, the atmosphere has changed of recent...
...although this was perhaps a major contributing factor within this history of the denial of past AVC’s when the Constitutional requirements for them had been met–and perhaps if allowed back then we would not be in the mess that we are in now–nevertheless I am not a member of a group or a person who works to set up the fear in people of an AVC–I am a person who says that within the context of the past three or four decades and especially currently it would be DISASTROUS to the continued insurance of the future liberty of our citizens and to the maintenance of our national sovereignty according to the intent of the original Constitution to have one now!!!–simply because the wrong players are currently in power...
...a quote from your website:
“They ignore the fact that the Framers also provided a safety mechanism to prevent such a fiasco: all amendments proposed by the convention must be ratified by three-quarters of the states before they become effective. There is no danger that radicals on either side of the political spectrum could bring about such an outcome.” [emphasis mine]...
...unfortunately, currently, we are not battling “radicals on either side of the political spectrum” in order to salvage our Constitution in its original state of intent–we are battling radicals on both sides of the political spectrum who are successfully promoting an agenda of Globalism, One World Government and a New World Order–and there is no room in their designs for our national sovereignty and our Constitution!!!...
...I suppose the straw that broke my camel’s back was fourteen years ago when the US Senate and House of Representatives voted on and passed our nation’s joining of the GATT/WTO under very suspicious and questionable circumstances–something which I only just recently revisited in my Nolan Chart article The Birth of the Beast Revisited–an event after which I could no longer find any comfort whatsoever in the “safety mechanism to prevent such a fiasco” by a ratification of three-quarters of the individual States–we’re just now beginning to witness the results of what Sir James Goldsmith warned of in the massive hemorrhage of capital and the massive hemorrhage of jobs almost fifteen years after-the-fact–sow unto the wind/reap the whirlwind...
...and of course, along with this, the consideration of many other very suspicious and questionable circumstances which have occurred since then which have subsequently eroded our liberty as formerly guaranteed by the Constitution...
...I guess the current nomenclature is the “Social Progressives”–and if you don’t think that the “Social Progressives” are not already poised and ready to dive headlong into a Constitutional Convention to effectively rip the guts out of the Constitution in order to make it more compliant to the designs of a One World Government–well then, there are still two camps of Constitutional patriots who disagree...
...I feel that with us being only two States away (and they’re letting us know about it this time around, finally–thanks for informing us of the past, Bill) from an AVC that one is looming, unavoidable and inevitable (because now the “powers that be” want it). So what would be the recommended course of action? Is there time for the voting constituency of the individual States to vote for and install true Constitutionalists to their State governments in order for them to represent the preservation of the Constitution according to its original intent when a the AVC is eventually convened!?!–Time will tell...
...it’s worth a shot, anyway...