America may be the only nation on earth in which its citizens can choose up sides to discuss things and then map out the nation’s course.

This is because Americans were the first to design the manner by which we could produce goods and services on our own; to sell, as well as choose which goods and services we would choose to buy or sell, and in a reciprocal way so that no person could exercise power over the others.

Every element of our economy was an act of free will, even the act of quitting a farm we owned to take a job in a steel mill, or a factory because the return was better, like my grandfather. But even the boss’s power over us extended only to the front gate of his business, just as the parson’s authority ended at the front gate of our home. Even the state has to have special written permission from a court to come into our House without our first giving permission.

Someone once wrote that

“The Lord sometimes gives the remedy first…then the disease.”

Whoever that someone was, he may have been talking about Government.

And with an election coming up, I want to focus attention on one of those “first principles” I keep talking about, such as the things being tried today to change how we created our Government.

Democrats today could be better understood if we defined them as “Royalists”, instead of “Socialists” or “Communists”, whose philosophical concepts, quite frankly, are complex and far too difficult for American-educated Leftists to grasp.

You see, “Royalism” is much easier for the simple political mind to understand, since all it requires is having either a rich daddy or access to a bunch of sugar daddies.

Of the modern political “isms”, “Fascism” is a better fit, for it implies at least an understanding of how an economy works; from the production of goods and services (producers), to their distribution, (transportation), to the marketing and selling of those goods, (persuaders).

By contrast, the principal failing grade about socialism and communism is that their founder-great minds knew nothing about the supply end of government, so preferred to design inept bureaucracies that only looked good on paper to cure all the ills about the way people lived.

Neither Karl Marx nor the non-Marxist Fabian socialists of England knew any more about the feeding of a society than did their later practitioners; Lenin-Stalin-Mao-Fidel; since 1918 a century of failures that continue to amaze since all, up to Maduro, have refused to reform the one thing that destroyed all those economies, their bureaucracy. So, that beat goes on.

The dividing line between Marxist-type fixes and Royalism is largely “god” since communism officially denies religion totally, while Royalism from the earliest of times has always gotten the legitimacy of its authority from their gods, and from that, an imbedded sense that they are not only all-powerful, but Good. Marxism’s “god is science” can’t even come close to matching that.

So, for modern Democrats, their “royalism” is not a canard or a hoax. It’s a genuine self-deception, once again proving that even in the soul of the deepest creeps is the need to convince themselves that they are “doing good”.

That all began when the Roman Church first began crowning kings in Europe (the first one French!), thus sanctioning their kingships in the eyes of God, instantaneously changing them from “barbarian” to “civilized”. This was in the year 800 AD, (one thousand two hundred and twenty-years ago; count it) ending the darkest part of what is known as the Dark Ages in Europe, when Rome was sacked and burned by barbarian tribes and their warfare covered Europe. 1) By having the Church’s blessings the notion of “divine right of kings” began seeping into the whole idea of governance, that belief not entirely dying out until 1918, just a hundred years ago, with WWI. Worse, 2) The Feudal System was built on its back, which essentially made the primary owner of all the land, the King, also the owner of the people who were attached to it (serfs, i.e., slaves). That system didn’t completely unravel until the 15th Century, but the first cracks began at, yes, Runnymede in 1215, when the English king (John) had to strike an indirect bargain with the working people there that would put English commoners three centuries ahead of the rest of Europe and also why it was freemen from England who founded America in 1607, and not French or Spanish businessmen.. (I wrote a comparison between French and English serfs in 2013 which you may find instructive.)

(And speaking of “divine”, some say God may have had a hand in all that. A circumstantial case can certainly be made, that is, if you believe in that sort of thing.)

I only want to impress on the reader just how long, if you go back to the earliest of civilizations, that notion of a “divine right” to rule over others has existed. Close to 5000 years. It really is hard to wean out of mankind, especially it’s go-getter Alpha’s, something so deeply imbedded. For that belief in one’s divine right invested in him (only “him” in those days) that his bloodline alone 1) allowed him to rule over others as he wished, and 2) that every excess of his that harmed others would be forgiven him…if he could only be lucky enough to have a priest at his side at the time of his passing, or, (developed not long afterward) a document, called a will, would be left that made a handsome donation to the local abbey, which is turn would forgive him sins, post mortem.

I can’t know what dwells in the hearts of individual Democrats; a Pelosi, a Biden, a Schumer, an Obama, a Schiff…good God, make your own list!…but with the possible exception of a Joe Biden, or a Bob Menendez, both throwbacks to when corruption was preferred simply because it paid well, most of these have self-hypnotized themselves into believing that what they are doing is Good, just as the Lord of a Manor in Nottinghamshire did when he executed a serf for killing one of “his” deer in one of “his” forests.

So, this is an important consideration, this ambition among power-seekers to anoint themselves “royal”. It comes from deep within the soul of the power-hungry

Just remember: if it walks like a royal, and quacks like a royal, it wants to be a royal, and there will always be an eternal struggle with it and men who want to be free.

Beneath those lying eyes are men and women who believe they truly are ordained by a higher cause, (No, really) and that their cause is therefore just. Only they don’t have political power now, and with God’s help, they never will.

For what they don’t seem to be able to do is regain the saddles high up on those horses the American people sit in.

We are mounted and they are afoot, and even more importantly, we have almost all the guns.

Play that card last.

But wisely.

Besides the piece cited above about the French Jacquerie, we’ve discussed for at least 10 years, even at RedState.com in 2010, “Vain Men’s Thirst for Kings vs The Least Men Standing” and 2013, here, “Man’s Thirst for Kings”  and in 2016, “L’Etat c’est Moi, the Rise of a Genuine Royal Class in America” 

Think about it. You’ll be seeing this type for the rest of your lives.

Previous articleIs it Time for the Old God to Take Control Again?
Next articleHistorical notes of the Transcendence of the American Theology

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here