Sham representation signals end to liberty
Alan Keyes
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place ...
— James Madison, The Federalist, No. 10
Recent reports concerning politics in Virginia and Iowa suggest that the GOP primary process is shaping up in a way that illustrates and confirms the notion that the current partisan political process is an endemically flawed, elite-manipulated sham.
Thanks to the elitist faction's corruption of the political process, the practice of psychological terrorism has apparently become an indispensable tactic in every election cycle. This tactic calls for the fabrication and promotion of a bogeyman, a political scarecrow employed to stampede an otherwise resistant herd of voters toward the candidate or candidates acceptable to the domineering elite. The ideal situation, from the vantage point of the elite faction, is a general election in which both candidates serve the elitist factional interest, so that whichever way it turns the affrighted electorate has no choice by which to escape elite domination. As I have elsewhere argued at length (see "America's Real Party System"), this elite strategy culminated in an election in 2008 in which both candidates for president of the United States represented "elite ambition that seeks to overthrow America's democratic constitutional republic."
Of course, to restrict choice in the final election, the two-party system must implement an approach to the parties' candidate-selection process (party conventions, caucuses or primaries) that is similarly restrictive. But until fairly recently the elite faction has considered it imperative to show decent respect for the outward forms of constitutional self-government, which require that candidates be chosen in elections that appear to be truly free and open to all. Even according to the logic of the elitists' purely Machiavellian ambition for power and control, this makes sense. After all, people are more likely to acquiesce in laws and policies damaging to their rights and interests when vain pride in their own judgment gives them reason to ignore what they would otherwise have to acknowledge as foolishly self-inflicted damage. From the Machiavellian perspective, isn't the manipulation of this vain pride the main purpose of government "in which the scheme of representation takes place"?
Unhappily, during the last several years many "signs and portents" have appeared to confirm the imminent, irretrievable demise of America's constitutional republic. We have seen:
American history is, however, replete with examples of arrogant elites who for a time imposed their tyranny at the local or state level. Though sometimes punctuated with violence (from the range wars in Western territories and states, to conflicts between workers and mine owners in places like West Virginia, to large-scale unrest on the streets of our large cities in more recent times), the framework of representative, electoral government has thus far always provided a means to thwart, undo, or tame schemes of elite domination — until now. At the national level, have the American people ever before confronted such an implacable, shrewd and thus far successful attempt to impose an electoral process that closes off every avenue of real choice for the people?
In Iowa, elitist hacks are openly declaring that a Ron Paul victory should be treated as null and void, however authentically it reflects the vote count in the caucuses. (Keep in mind that the vote count itself is subject to falsification, as my supporters in Iowa experienced firsthand in 2008.) Meanwhile, using the prospect of such a victory, the Ron Paul scarecrow is being fabricated and carried about in order to drive voters into the arms of candidates like Romney or Gingrich. Taken as a whole, the respective stands of such candidates on fatal-flaw issues like abortion, Obamacare, imposing acceptance of homosexuality and neglect of border security can be cited to legitimize Obama's destructive policies across the board. (This is to say that on any given issue you can point to at least one Republican being touted as "conservative" and/or "constitutional" whose record on the issue is as bad as or worse than Obama's. For example, all of the GOP candidates have passively accepted the bipartisan abandonment of the Constitution when it comes to Obama's eligibility for office. And please take note: With respect to Obama's duplicitous, pro-Islamic-extremist foreign and national security policies, as well as his stands on issues of moral right, like the government's obligation, at all levels, to secure the right to life; as well as the defense of the God-endowed rights of the natural family against so called "gay rights," Ron Paul is no exception.)
In Virginia, the GOP's ballot access provisions have produced an outcome that pits the scarecrow Paul against the favorite of the GOP crypto-socialists, Mitt Romney, excluding everyone else. This result makes the true aim the elite faction's manipulated primary process embarrassingly clear. Restrict access to produce a ballot that strengthens the prospects of the candidate preferred by the GOP power elite. The Iowa situation hoists the Ron Paul scarecrow. The Virginia situation positions Romney to knock it down. As far as the elitists are concerned, elections aren't meant to elect candidates who actually represent the voters. They are staged scenarios meant to legitimize an elite-faction candidate otherwise unacceptable to the majority of voters. Other participants are used or tolerated in the process only as foils, to give an appearance of choice and competition where there is none.
This results in "free" elections no more real than those under the Communist faction in the old Soviet Union. The two-party gloss may ease the elite faction's unconstitutional usurpation of power. It may serve to perfume the stink of tyranny already beginning to come off the corpse of America's liberty. But nonetheless it palpably fogs the atmosphere. Given the true nature of the era in which we live (not the common but the Christian era, whether we will or no), resurrection is not impossible. But it will not come to pass unless people are willing to look for political justice in accordance with the vision of the Creator God, as America's founders did. Only then will they see the elite faction's partisan sham for what it is — a calculated, destructive betrayal of true representation, intended once and for all to bring America's experiment in constitutional self-government to a close.
Originally published December 29, 2011, at WorldNetDaily
December 30, 2011
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place ...— James Madison, The Federalist, No. 10
Recent reports concerning politics in Virginia and Iowa suggest that the GOP primary process is shaping up in a way that illustrates and confirms the notion that the current partisan political process is an endemically flawed, elite-manipulated sham.
Thanks to the elitist faction's corruption of the political process, the practice of psychological terrorism has apparently become an indispensable tactic in every election cycle. This tactic calls for the fabrication and promotion of a bogeyman, a political scarecrow employed to stampede an otherwise resistant herd of voters toward the candidate or candidates acceptable to the domineering elite. The ideal situation, from the vantage point of the elite faction, is a general election in which both candidates serve the elitist factional interest, so that whichever way it turns the affrighted electorate has no choice by which to escape elite domination. As I have elsewhere argued at length (see "America's Real Party System"), this elite strategy culminated in an election in 2008 in which both candidates for president of the United States represented "elite ambition that seeks to overthrow America's democratic constitutional republic."
Of course, to restrict choice in the final election, the two-party system must implement an approach to the parties' candidate-selection process (party conventions, caucuses or primaries) that is similarly restrictive. But until fairly recently the elite faction has considered it imperative to show decent respect for the outward forms of constitutional self-government, which require that candidates be chosen in elections that appear to be truly free and open to all. Even according to the logic of the elitists' purely Machiavellian ambition for power and control, this makes sense. After all, people are more likely to acquiesce in laws and policies damaging to their rights and interests when vain pride in their own judgment gives them reason to ignore what they would otherwise have to acknowledge as foolishly self-inflicted damage. From the Machiavellian perspective, isn't the manipulation of this vain pride the main purpose of government "in which the scheme of representation takes place"?
Unhappily, during the last several years many "signs and portents" have appeared to confirm the imminent, irretrievable demise of America's constitutional republic. We have seen:
- general and bipartisan refusal to show any respect for the Constitution's plainly stated requirements with respect to any candidate's eligibility to be elected president of the United States;
- egregious disregard for the Constitution's plainly stated mandates concerning the legislative process of the U.S. government, in particular the requirement that "all bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives" (Article I, Section 7);
- usurpation by the federal judiciary of the powers of government that affect the people's religious liberty, powers reserved by the Constitution's 10th Amendment to the States, respectively and to the people;
- the U.S. government's perilous and unconscionable neglect of its responsibility to secure the borders and territory of the United States;
- the invasion of the personal and public rights of the people, including judicial decisions, laws and policies intended to attack, subvert or refuse to secure:
- the right to life;
- the right to keep and bear arms;
- the rights of property (in particular the right to use or refrain from using personal resources to purchase government mandated goods and services);
- the natural rights of family;
- the right to due process and equal protection of the laws.
- the right to life;
American history is, however, replete with examples of arrogant elites who for a time imposed their tyranny at the local or state level. Though sometimes punctuated with violence (from the range wars in Western territories and states, to conflicts between workers and mine owners in places like West Virginia, to large-scale unrest on the streets of our large cities in more recent times), the framework of representative, electoral government has thus far always provided a means to thwart, undo, or tame schemes of elite domination — until now. At the national level, have the American people ever before confronted such an implacable, shrewd and thus far successful attempt to impose an electoral process that closes off every avenue of real choice for the people?
In Iowa, elitist hacks are openly declaring that a Ron Paul victory should be treated as null and void, however authentically it reflects the vote count in the caucuses. (Keep in mind that the vote count itself is subject to falsification, as my supporters in Iowa experienced firsthand in 2008.) Meanwhile, using the prospect of such a victory, the Ron Paul scarecrow is being fabricated and carried about in order to drive voters into the arms of candidates like Romney or Gingrich. Taken as a whole, the respective stands of such candidates on fatal-flaw issues like abortion, Obamacare, imposing acceptance of homosexuality and neglect of border security can be cited to legitimize Obama's destructive policies across the board. (This is to say that on any given issue you can point to at least one Republican being touted as "conservative" and/or "constitutional" whose record on the issue is as bad as or worse than Obama's. For example, all of the GOP candidates have passively accepted the bipartisan abandonment of the Constitution when it comes to Obama's eligibility for office. And please take note: With respect to Obama's duplicitous, pro-Islamic-extremist foreign and national security policies, as well as his stands on issues of moral right, like the government's obligation, at all levels, to secure the right to life; as well as the defense of the God-endowed rights of the natural family against so called "gay rights," Ron Paul is no exception.)
In Virginia, the GOP's ballot access provisions have produced an outcome that pits the scarecrow Paul against the favorite of the GOP crypto-socialists, Mitt Romney, excluding everyone else. This result makes the true aim the elite faction's manipulated primary process embarrassingly clear. Restrict access to produce a ballot that strengthens the prospects of the candidate preferred by the GOP power elite. The Iowa situation hoists the Ron Paul scarecrow. The Virginia situation positions Romney to knock it down. As far as the elitists are concerned, elections aren't meant to elect candidates who actually represent the voters. They are staged scenarios meant to legitimize an elite-faction candidate otherwise unacceptable to the majority of voters. Other participants are used or tolerated in the process only as foils, to give an appearance of choice and competition where there is none.
This results in "free" elections no more real than those under the Communist faction in the old Soviet Union. The two-party gloss may ease the elite faction's unconstitutional usurpation of power. It may serve to perfume the stink of tyranny already beginning to come off the corpse of America's liberty. But nonetheless it palpably fogs the atmosphere. Given the true nature of the era in which we live (not the common but the Christian era, whether we will or no), resurrection is not impossible. But it will not come to pass unless people are willing to look for political justice in accordance with the vision of the Creator God, as America's founders did. Only then will they see the elite faction's partisan sham for what it is — a calculated, destructive betrayal of true representation, intended once and for all to bring America's experiment in constitutional self-government to a close.
Originally published December 29, 2011, at WorldNetDaily