“Power, which holds
itself in opposition to law, is evil and tyrannical. No one is required to be bound (by) it, and it may be legitimately resisted.
There is no imaginable reason why wickedness can oblige anyone. We are under no commandment (of God’s) to suffer the
abuse of wicked men...” Samuel Rutherford's LEX REX—1644
Here are stated the basic tenets
for the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution 132 years before their creations. The premises of Samuel
Rutherford’s Lex Rex (which means literally that Law is King) is based on the Laws of God as stated in the Bible and
demonstrated by history. Laws so firm that no power, of government or it’s supporters, can endeavor to supercede or
replace them without putting themselves in danger of losing their position and/or their own lives.
Yet, recent events at the United
Nations would have us believe that finally the right people are in position to establish a world government. A government
predicated, not on any moral law or the rights of man, but founded on the ideal that through the force of their will a group
of elitists can make a more perfect union, if only those who believe in the law, as stated above, would see the error of their
ways, give over their right of self-determination and self-protection by laying down their guns.
In the maniacal ravings of
the world’s leaders and their supporters belay the seeds of their own destruction. All of history and more importantly
recent history screams at the foolishness of their ideas with warnings of destruction. Are they so confident they can turn
back the laws that foretell their fate? Are they so sure they are ordained to do what their predecessors tried and failed
to do? What of their supporters; will they share in this glorious New World order? Who will be the first to be relegated to the dung heap of history as a postscript
in a long list of obituary notices? As gun owners, where do we stand in the scheme of things?
History is replete with tyrants,
despots and would-be world rulers, so we shouldn’t be surprised if a relatively constant pattern has emerged of how
these people act and what they are likely to do at any given stage of their rise and fall. It is a fact that as one rises
to the position of despot he will not directly assault the greatest force aligned against him until a high probability of
success exists. We can characterize this like water flowing downhill. When it is met with resistance it finds an alternate
path before continuing it’s course, while continuing to chip away at the original obstacle, but as water becomes more
of a force it will overwhelm or destroy any object that impedes it’s journey. This should be of some comfort to those
of us who own firearms but we should remain ever vigilant in protecting our rights.
There is no doubt that the
new elitists of today would be delighted if they could pass a law so that everyone in the world would relinquish ownership
of their firearms, while wistfully bowing to the commands of the new order’s leader(s). It would certainly make things
easier for the implementation of their agenda, but they know that this won’t happen. So like water they will content
themselves with going around firearm owners, along with anyone who holds freedom dear, until they believe they have the power
in place to take us on with a high probability of success and acceptable losses. What are these despots and elitists likely
to do before they are forced by their own paranoia to assault gun owners?
Not once in the long lineage
of the world’s dictators has one ruled with the consent of a committee like the United Nations. The egomania of a tyrant
will not allow any others to share his power or position. This can be demonstrated from history time and time again. Recent
history has given us two good examples of the metamorphic stages taken by tyrants and would-be world dictators. It is also
very descriptive of who is at immediate risk and why.
The rise of any tyrant requires
that he offer order out of chaos…a methodology that has been used since man first sought to enslave his fellow man.
During the French revolution the
“committee of Public
Safety - a revolutionary tribunal - was also set up. The revolutionary tribunal was to try counter revolutionaries. Then the
Committee developed a new policy that involved the use of the guillotine across France.
Many were killed, most from the aristocracy classes or those that were of wealth. The Committee was in favor of imposed equality
by direct democracy, punishment and violence. The guillotine was the scythe of equality, the people’s axe.”
“There was the introduction
of the ‘Law of Suspects’. This Law allowed for the arrest of those that were believed to have opposed the revolution.
The Law of the Maximum was also introduced which allowed for the setting of price ceilings. The Jacobin dominated Committee
loosely followed the needs of the Sans-Culottes (the first working class groups that incorporated both a political stance
and a social condition in support of the revolution). This allowed for greater popularity. They were well known as defending
We are now introduced to two
characters who played an instrumental part in ushering Napoleon into the position of supreme ruler and who, except for those
avid students of the French Revolution, stand as only ignominious foot notes to history.
believed that the external and internal threats had been dealt with he called for an end to the terror. Robespierre had him
and his closest followers executed. This shocked many of the moderates within the convention as they thought if Danton was
not safe who would be. They labeled Robespierre a terrorist and he was executed on July
Nor was the effect of
the revolution lost on Napoleon for after he had seized power, through conspiracy and a successful coup, he set his policies
in place and the reforms effected all Frenchmen.
disappeared; the press was censored; the schools and Church taught loyalty to Napoleon; the secret police imprisoned or murdered
Napoleon’s enemies.” (We can read closest friends and perceived enemies and be just as accurate; in short, the
purge at the top was complete to the point that none could be found who were capable of offering a threat to Napoleon’s
position or power.) “Napoleon claimed Frenchmen only wanted glory, aggressive Nationalism and demagogic leadership.
‘I sealed the gulf of anarchy and unraveled chaos. I purified the Revolution and strengthened the monarchy.’”
This, then, is the method of
operation for all who have sought to enslave their fellow man through government. Stalin was so convinced of the usefulness
of purging the leadership and friendly allies, Robert Conquest, an historian, and Senior Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution,
Stanford University, writes,
“The extent of
the long-drawn-out Stalin terror is now at last being fully and irrefutably demonstrated… The process and structure
of the political system under Stalin demanded complete obedience. People with principles or independence did not participate
in politics--or they were killed. People that were naturally competitive or ambitious, even if they were willing to follow
Stalin’s leadership, didn’t last long in Stalin’s government of mistrust and purges.”
What are the numbers of those
who did not fit Stalin’s ideal and were killed? Robert Conquest places it at 20 to 25 million of these; the majority
were communist party member and the educated. In Stalin’s case, his purges were so extensive that when he lay dying
his closest advisers would not call a doctor for fear of starting another purge. Robert Conquest points out that
“Stalin had taken control
of the Soviet Union’s political process in the 1920’s; and with the death of Vladimir Lenin,
Stalin killed all opposition to his will. He had taken a political system unleashed by the revolution of 1917 and had turned
it into a killing machine. He was the undisputed ruler of the Soviet Union. However, he found himself
at the head of an empire, far too large for a single man to control effectively. He wanted obedient legislators to carry out
his policies--not fresh thinkers. Because Guardians, as a personality type, tend to do things ‘by the rules’ and
to not change things, conforming Guardians populated a vast majority of the communist party, with hardly any Idealists, Rationales,
We could call as witnesses
Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot and others who have tried to set themselves in the position of supreme ruler, and the stories do not
deviate much from the two above. The first to be “sacrificed” for the greater good are those who:
establish the system with direct support,
been instrumental in convincing the population to support the radical “new” changes and
in authority who stand idly by while the treachery is accomplished.
At this junction it is
fair to ask: why would a tyrant turn on those supporters who helped transfer power to the new regime, especially when this
generally includes the industrial leadership, educational elite, writers, news organization leaders, movie stars, military
elite, judges, etc.?
The answer lays, in part,
in Nicolo Machiavelli’s 1515 work entitled “The Prince”. Whether we believe Machiavelli’s work to
be the instruction manual for tyrants or not, the fact remains, “The Prince” stands as a brilliant work for those
who would use the dark side of human nature to rule and enslave others. Machiavelli has an uncanny ability to clearly delineate
the tenets that come into play when governments and rulers defy the Law as established by God and defined in “Lex Rex”.
It makes no difference which (if any) of the dictators of the modern era have read Machiavelli’s works, they all have
adhered to its tenets of cruelty.
In chapter 8 of “The
Prince” Machiavelli points out that any purges should begin early:
“Hence it is to be
remarked that, in seizing a state, the usurper ought to examine closely into all those injuries which it is necessary for
him to inflict, and to do them all at one stroke so as not to have to repeat them daily…”.
This stands as a matter of
self-preservation, for those who would assume the title of supreme ruler must quickly and irrevocably establish their authority.
“He who does otherwise,
either from timidity or evil advice, is always compelled to keep the knife in his hand; neither can he rely on his subjects
(supporters), nor can they attach themselves to him, owing to their continued and repeated wrongs.”
Machiavelli’s real genius
is in defining for the “prince” who will stand as his greatest enemies. These enemies are defined in chapter 17
- where Machiavelli argues that it is better for the ruler to be feared than loved. He first points out that supporters are
those who, like the ruler, are men and [b]ecause this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous…”.
This, indeed, can be
said of all men, but Machiavelli further defines those to be feared as any who “will offer you (the prince) their blood,
property, life and children… when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you”.
Men and women who have
aided in establishing tyrannical rule have shown that they are already treacherous. What then is their motivation? It is in
fact simple: The promise of securing riches, power and position as the rewards for their support. The high ideals of love
for the tyrant and/or his philosophy are simply for mass consumption. Greed is the base motive.
prince who, relying entirely on their promises, (and) has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that
are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in
time of need cannot be relied upon…”.
Machiavelli points out
that the taking of life is to be a integral part of ruling as long as the assassinations can be properly justified within
the closed circle of support. In the mind of the tyrant, the treachery and greed of the new ruling class has now become the
greatest threat to his position and power. But to those who curry his favor, these murders help to solidify his control of
the military, the new elite class and general population by means of fear! Once, this occurs all pretenses of nobility may
“…When a prince
is with his army, and has under control a multitude of soldiers, then it is quite necessary for him to disregard the reputation
of cruelty, for without it he would never hold his army united or disposed to its duties. Among the wonderful deeds of Hannibal
this one is enumerated: that having led an enormous army, composed of many various races of men, to fight in foreign lands,
no dissension arose either among them or against the prince, whether in his bad or in his good fortune. This arose from nothing
else than his inhuman cruelty, which, with his boundless valor, made him revered and terrible in the sight of his soldiers…”.
Any who may have the
ability to turn the population and/or military against the new ruler are, and always will be, eliminated. This is the only
process that demented minds have that can centralize all power in a single authoritarian figure.
What can we then expect?
With history as our guide, five general phases must take place before any "new and improved" model of the age-old totalitarian
system is fully in place. Bear in mind that each may run, in part, concurrent to the other and there may or may not be any
clear line of demarcation between each event. These stages are as follow:
- The continuous, relentless denial of basic individual rights, frequently under the guise of protecting the populace
or making life safer. (Remember the water example.)
* These will include but are not limited to rights of free speech,
freedom of religion, property rights, right to bear arms and the right of assembly. I have only listed those rights that a
totalitarian government will fear the most. Remember, all rights will eventually be denied; we shouldn’t be lax in our
defense of the basic rights of all men and women.
* With the loss of basic rights, certain politically acceptable groups
will be granted rights and privileges denied all others, but, historically, this lasts only for a short time and will be taken
from everyone when the ruling elite are firmly established and in control.
“Necessity is the plea for every infringement
of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” ~~William Pitt 1783
- A pervasive moral decay in:
* Governmental institutions at the Federal, State and Local levels.
* Religious organizations
at the leadership levels
* Industrial and business leadership leading to business leaving the country and establishing
trade from foreign shores.
* Information systems (News media, movie industry, etc.)
* Government sponsored education
"All ran toward their chains, believing that they were securing their liberty, for although they had reason enough
to discern the advantages of a civil order, they did not have experience enough to foresee the dangers." ~~J. J. Rousseau,
* An event of such magnitude that it brings society to its knees and prepares the masses to accept any promise
of social and economic order without questioning the means for reestablishing that order. In the near future, we could face
a complete collapse of our economic system and/or a military catastrophe that leaves the nation along with the world completely
decimated. Here we are at the mercy of those who are planning the carnage. FDR warned us that nothing happens in government
or economics that isn’t planned.
“What luck for
the rulers that men do not think.” ~~Adolf Hitler
point, the stages may run concurrently, or they may be in inverse order. I have chosen the following order based on what I
believe is the most logical scenario given the present political climate and structure.
- The promise of return to social order.
* This stage introduces one or more “candidates” vying for supreme
authority. The criteria for their selection is based on what support can be garnered from the masses, support of the military,
and how quickly any opponent can be dispatched. The masses are given promises that will never be kept and assurances that
make them passive to the actual atrocities taking place.
“People never lie so much as after a hunt, during a war
or before an election.” ~~Otto von Bismarck
- The beginning of the Purges.
* This begins as
a solidification of power and the final test of complete authority. It generally begins as explained earlier, then filters
down to the masses who are only a perceived threat to the regime.
“In any country there must be people who have to
die. They are the sacrifices any nation has to make to achieve law and order.” ~~Idi Amin Dada
Where do we stand - as
gun owners and the guardians of freedom - in relation to the events unfolding around us? We are, to the elite, back woods
hicks; men and women of no consequence who will be dealt with at a later date but at the moment, people short on intelligence
and long on stupidity; dolts who can not possibly know what we need. (Please note this is not a guess. President Clinton doesn’t
even want us to have our own money back in tax relief because, “we (Clinton Administration) can’t be sure you
will spend it properly”.
Can you think of a more ignorant,
arrogant statement? We are those who will be happy when shown the proper way to live in the New World
order and who will either partake of the fruits of nirvana or be destroyed. Will the New World order
succeed? Well, that depends on us. Are we willing to capitulate and give our firearms to those egomaniacs who feel they know
what is best and who say they are willing to protect us?
In numbers there is strength
(there are more than 80 million owners of firearms in the U.S.
alone), and we are a force that will eventually have to be reckoned with. We can sit and watch as the feeding frenzy among
this group of elite fools plays itself out.
We will see the names
of the dead and missing; those that have been a threat to the new regime or felt they could do a better job. Some of us may
even be witness to the destruction of those who now seek to destroy us. We will see who is left standing and who has emerged
as our mortal and moral enemy. Each of us will either decide to be part of the New World order or be
one of the hidden seeds of destruction that they fear the most.
Ben Franklin’s words have never been truer then they are today:
hang together or we will most assuredly hang separately.”
For my family and I, we will stay armed, stay informed, and stay vigilant. There can be no substitute for freedom;
the Law remains King.