on cinematic directives

After watching the movie ‘Exit Through The Giftshop’, I labored to become a real graffito. Stickers. Studying. Field excursions. Permanent markers. More stickers. Reconnaissance. Repetition, repetition, repetition. Now, after having watched the movie ‘The Trotsky’ (starring Jay Baruchel), I ask myself if I am going to become a real revolutionary - not just some bitchy, uppity sap who spews forth with a weak broth of political vituperation on blogs that few people read and websites that few people visit. (I shall let this last sentence as an example of the self-deprecating thought processes and the vigilant self-censorship that many economic Untermenschen in America have been trained to exhibit in order to keep themselves in a state of mental and emotional subjugation.) It matters little how many people read these writings, for it is not up to me to direct or hinder the attentions of my fellow man; such decisions are made by forces beyond our ken, and I ought be happy with whatever I receive. (Hence this ancient saying: The giver knows the fullness of life, the taker but at an empty hand.)

Now, I have the opportunity to study the relevant texts and expand upon the ideas that America’s Founders laid down for a (Marxist) communist utopia upon her shores; to emulate the thinking and draw from the rhetoric that led millions to rise up in rebellion against their czarist overlords a century ago this year; and to rouse the rabble in the defense and reclamation of the rights and privileges taken from us by elected officials who have forgotten that their mission is to work for the benefit of all Americans not to enrich their affluent friends by keeping America in a constant state of war. Should I choose to take this path, I endeavor to avoid reinventing the wheel by culling from the great political works of the past such notions and platforms as I feel will help me and those who might join this cause to create a Ynki nation where all things that government does ‘seem most likely to effect [our] Safety and Happiness‘ (Declaration of Independence). Thanks for reading, and have a nice day!

JPR / whorphan / americanifesto / 場黑麥

pretty much fucked

For the average citizen, ignorance of the law does not excuse him from punishment. Consider that taken together federal, state, and local laws number in the tens of thousands, and change, constantly. Without focused effort, however, most Americans commit 3 felonies a day, as Mr. Harvey Silverglate of Boston writes in his book. When looked at critically, this system seems to exist not to protect or better lives but to extort cash from or transfer into prison-slavery people who get caught breaking said myriad laws. (Please note: according to the U.S. Constitution, slavery is still legal in America, but only as a form of punishment, i.e. prison.) For the citizen working as a police officer, however, ignorance of the law - ignorance even of the fundamental tenets of the Constitution - is met not with reprimand but reward. Following Heien v. North Carolina, citizens working in the police forces can violate the rights and freedoms of their fellow citizens, first performing warrant-less searches then claiming ignorance of the Constitution’s 4th amendment protections against same. What sort of nation allows a heavily armed police force - a standing army beholden to neither established law nor the opinions of mankind - to operate free of the constraints of the very document upon which it was founded? What sort of country sends the armed agents it has chosen to enforce its laws out into the street without first making sure they understand the contents of the very document they at some point swore to protect and uphold? When a terrorist attacks, the various churches of the religion he claims adherence to come forward and denounce his violent ways. Where, however, are the voices of the various police departments around America coming forward to denounce extrajudicial executions committed by their brothers in blue? Are police unions in large numbers urging their members to stop escalating roadside encounters and stating publicly that they do not condone violent acts against unarmed civilians regardless of creed, hue, or race? The police unions are not, and great numbers of police officers are not, because citizens who work as police officers exist not to protect the rest of us but to distrust, fine, follow, track, stalk, and - if startled - shoot those of us who do not work as police officers. Now, more than perhaps ever before, the age-old concerns about watchers (and who watches them) lick hot at the forefront of the mind.

Video recordings abound of police officers shooting unarmed or legally armed average civilians out of at best fearful aggression and at worst hateful convenience. When investigated, most of the shootings are deemed justified - by an attorney general or equivalent legal party who works frequently with the trigger-happy police officer and his colleagues, who must depend on the man’s good favor to efficiently perform his daily duties, and who is thus inclined to find the man’s behavior in accordance with whatever police-specific or special laws that he and his ilk conspire to uphold and protect. (The American people have given police officers leave to break the law - to lie, cheat, and steal - in order to secure a criminal conviction. Ought we be surprised that they’ve decided to include in their list of permitted crimes that of shooting first and asking the questions later?) The lawless savagery of absolute Despotism that occurs when those supposed to keep the peace are given leave to break it - at will and without fear of punishment - runs counter to the letter of our nation’s founding document, the Declaration of Independence. (In reality, It offers the People no protections, however, as in the opinion of the U.S. federal government the Declaration has no legal weight or legislative significance.) Among the causes that compelled the Founding Persons to declare their separation from the British empire was as follows - For Quartering large bodies of troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States(.) When reading the Declaration immediately after you finish this piece, I challenge you to substitute ‘the King of Great Britain’ with ‘the U.S. federal government.’ How similar to the conditions we face today were those which drove the Founding Persons to call bullshit and ouster their plutocratic overlords? (In a widely-circulated official Pentagon training manual, the Founding Persons - George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, &c. are referred to as criminal extremists one rung below outright terrorists who would today be barred from military service). Are the conditions we currently face but another example of sic semper tyrannis, proof that a political force of sufficient size and longevity will naturally evolve into the very oppressive and dastardly power it once sought to overthrow - even a political force conceived for and supposedly dedicated to the purpose of bringing betterment and liberty to a large mass of people?

Unless we average citizens do something very soon, the million tentacles of the teenage police-state throbbing in our midst will seek out and suffocate what few freedoms we have left. Since 2001 C.E., civilians working as police officers have killed more unarmed and innocent civilians than the terrorists did on 11 September, albeit one or two and not hundreds or thousands at a time. How does one root out a beast as firmly latched to the fear-teat of modern America as a police force that slays our youth and hounds the defenseless whilst demanding knee-jerk and blind obedience to its every whim and fancy? A beast whose appetite for blood and gore never lingers, whose cruel heart pumps blood black and blue? Not quickly, efficiently, or thoroughly. To start, however, please know your rights, and record every interaction with the police. Beyond that, though, put on some lipstick and rouge, because we the People are pretty much fucked.

© americanifesto / 場黑麥

on providing Welfare

For this author, the main reason that we cannot allow Mitt Romney to gain our nation's highest office is that he has never read the Constitution of the United States of America. If the former governor of Massachusetts had at one time read even the preamble to this our second-most sacred document after the Declaration of Independence, he might have retained at least a distant memory that the role of government in this land is to provide for the general Welfare and to secure the Blessings of Liberty to us and to our Posterity. (Perhaps his and his Republican Party's openly-declared plans to amend the Constitution in order to define marriage as between 1 (one) man and 1 (one) woman include secret plans to edit out this embarrassing preamble, this handful of words that contradict Mr. Romney's apparent core beliefs by clearly stating that government in America is supposed to help and uplift as many people as possible, not make as few as possible fabulously rich.)

It is better, perhaps, for Mr. Romeny and the Republican Party in America (or RePIA, pronounced “rape-ya”) to remain ignorant of both the Declaration and the Constitution; if they were to take a closer look at either of these our precious documents, or to do any background investigations into the deeper meanings inherent to these two texts, they may find therein more passages aimed at spreading Liberty and equality amongst the peoples of the world that they would want to remove, amend, excise, cut out, and destroy. Curious to me is that Mitt-the-Governor-of-Massachusetts seemed to understand the role of our government far better than does Mitt-the-Candidate-for-President, he who appears to be catering to – openly and without shame – that billionaire lunatic-fringe that continues to profit from the Great Recession, from this nation's spreading of war across the globe, and from the purposeful and planned destruction of economic equality in America. I watch with consternation while riding my bicycle through this little blue-collar town as more and more banners appear on the lawns of modest homes that support Romney and Ryan; after talking with an Obama-hating neighbor, however, I am gaining some insight into his and the other Romney-supporters' views and methodology.

As far as I can tell, these people passionately hate Obama and timidly support Romney because they expose themselves to the narrow views of but a few political pundits, TV fear-mongers, and syndicated radio talk-show-hosts; they have allowed hatred to fester in their hearts by avoiding any opinions other than those that stoke their ire, preferring cocoons of self-righteous indignation to the rage-stilling effect of a careful and rational analysis of many different sources, news outlets, and opinions (my neighbor mentioned that he despised Obama not for his race but for being an idiot, even though we had not even come close to discussing the tone of our sitting President's skin). Dear reader, please understand that in the past I have been guilty of this same sort of behavior, passionately hating George W. Bush and mocking his every word and deed; now, however, seeing things from the Other Side, I recognize the danger that lurks in such narrow-minded and puffed-up views of the members of political parties. Hatred of this type obscures the true danger that is facing democracy and equality in America, which comes from people thinking that there is a difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties, that one is better than the other, that one has all of the answers and the other, none. Both of these Parties regularly mock the notion of representative government, both cater to fantastically-rich corporate and private donors to the detriment of tens of millions of hard-working average Americans, both are farcical shadows of their former selves, and both long ago sacrificed sacred Honor for the shallow reward of fleeting political power. Woe is unto us, friend – America delenda est; only through dastardly and destructive effort might we change the status-quo, and regain for ourselves all that we have lost. Mahalo, though, and keep fighting.

場黑麥 mentiri factorem fecit

an open letter to America's founding persons

Dear individuals who founded or influenced the founding of the United States of America: may you have a good day. I write to you across a long stretch of time – nearly two hundred and forty years – with greetings and supplications. Much is being said of late in this fine land you crafted so long ago about your intentions, your motives, and your goals. Friends, woe is befallen us, for we have taken the essence of the nation you designed in the Declaration of Independence and trampled it unceremoniously to dust. As Dr. Franklin warned after the ratification of the Constitution in 1787, we have not been able to hold on to the republic you created; rather, we have allowed the forces of blind and inexorable avarice (which we now refer to rather as corporation-based, consumption-driven capitalism) to all but ruin the seemingly boundless promise of your intended nation. No longer does government exist to serve the People – now its punishes with fines and imprisonment those of us who drink deeply of the Blessings of Liberty and who pursue our Happiness as we see best fit without infringing upon the Life, Liberty, or Property of any other person or persons; now it exists not to foster the free mind, the free life, or the free will but to punish the People for not living according to the rules it proclaims will bring the most benefit to the most people, rules, however, which are designed by and written for the benefit of a few hundred thousand of the richest citizens (and their respective corporate bodies) who enjoy privileged access to policy-makers due to their vast wealth, lack of humility, and insufficient focus on the Shared and Common Causes (making all people, equally, Safe and Happy) which should bind us, as countrymen, to one another, indelibly. Justice, friends, has been banished behind such dark and oppressive curtains as hang in our houses of deliberation; her blindfold has been removed in order to combat a poorly defined danger known as terrorism; and her sword now strikes down such persons – both native and foreign-born – as have not even been given a decent or fair trial by a jury of their peers. As mentioned previously, laws exist that promote neither the general Welfare nor that insure the domestic Tranquility but that subjugate the People to the whims of heavily-armed, fear-obsessed, oppression-minded police forces and that divert the vast wealth generated by the collective labor of this nation's citizens into the pockets of those few of us who have the best political connections and the broadest corporate reach. The noble cause of a more perfect Union has been replaced by the nation-wide homogenization of goods and services that has eroded the independent and self-respecting nature of the People, replacing it instead with a sheep-like mentality under which we slave primarily to fuel personal over-consumption of foodstuffs, electricity, and images that are piped at great expense into our homes where they move about on magical picture-boxes hanging from the walls.

Such is our suffering, and more. We move about not under our own power but atop and within auto-mobile metal boxes that are powered by the burning of a liquid pitch, an inflammable black goo that is pumped from the ground in distant places by hirsute, turbaned foreigners who use the profit from the sale of this oil to fund terrorist groups that in turn murder the People and maim our friends. Rather than raising and storing our own crops, we rely on foods that throughout their lives are sprayed regularly with an unknowable mixture of dangerous and volatile chemicals before they are moved nearly to our doorsteps via larger self-propelled metal boxes that travel upon thousands of miles of rock-and-liquid-pitch-paved roads; rather than raise our own livestock, we rely on meats that throughout their lives are injected regularly with an unknowable mixture of powerful medicines and growth-promoting chemicals before they are moved nearly to our doorsteps upon the aforementioned roads. And, due to this lack of autonomous locomotion and this over-abundance of foodstuffs, we have become lazy and fat, suffering therefore from fatness- and laziness-related diseases and dying of them by the hundreds of thousands.

Oh, dear brothers and sisters, you who stamped this nation out of the dust, who risked Life, Fortune, and Honor in order to create a nation dedicated to the Safety and Happiness of a free and independent People, please accept our apologies for destroying all that which you risked to create, and for desecrating and neglecting all that which you worked so hand to bring about. We are weak, we are spineless, and we hardly deserve even the last, dying remnants of that which you so diligently created. Please, dearest fore-fathers and fore-mothers, please forgive us, for we knew the dangers of the path we have stumbled down, choosing it however because it offered us the least resistance. America delenda est.

場黑麥 menterefecterem fecit

on the necessity of union

  When the Declaration of Independence was written, and its sister document, the Constitution, the need for Union among the States was great. Joined in Union, the States proved better able to effect their independence, and to stand strong collectively, a dozen-odd entities working together against the many pressures that faced our young nation as it fought to make a place for itself in the world, and to prove that its shockingly progressive ideals had staying-power.

  Then, halfway through the 19^th century, divergent forces and interests among the States compelled them to split apart into two separate nations, one seeking to maintain a slave-based economy, the other seeking, officially, to maintain the Union. Whole populations that no longer felt that they should be following the same path rose up in conflict, two seemingly foreign peoples that understood that they had grown simply too far apart in thought and in method to be able to stay together. In those times of relative national weakness and persistent internal turmoil, the Union held; it has held through two world wars, scores of other police-actions (including Vietnam, Afghanistan 2001, Iraq 2003), and rapid and widespread cultural and societal transformations both here and abroad.

  Today, however, we have witnessed the ascendancy of a federal supremacy over the states, and within that supremacy the elevation of the executive branch (in clear violation of the checks and balances built into the Constitution), as well as growing divergences between the citizens who live in roughly the same areas as those that split asunder in the 1860s. Two loose but still recognizable camps have formed in this nation, with millions of voters hovering at varying degrees around the edges of each, one camp calling for more punitive and dogmatic responses to our problems, a camp that relies on the gullibility of the masses for the propagation of its conservative views on religion and society, the other camp one that strives at least superficially for rational debate, the reinstatement of the constitutional right to liberty, and a more compassionate and socialistic view of the role that government and society must play in the elevation of the American People and in the bringing about of our Safety and Happiness. (It would be convenient to suppose that I am here referring to Republicans and Democrats respectively, but as these parties have become the necessary repositories of most anyone seeking political office, their ranks are as varied in their opinions as is the greater population, which is split roughly between liberals and conservatives, i.e. between those who seek to propagate liberty through rational debate and those who seek to maintain the status quo through Fear Of The Unknown and an inflexible mind-set. In my opinion, open debate and rational thinking are essential to the propagation of liberty, for the concept of liberty presupposes that the individual is capable of deciding for himself how best to lead his life: it demands of him that he understands the consequences of his actions while allowing him to live a virtuous life devoid of willful violations of the life, liberty, or property of his fellow persons.)

  Perhaps it would be best, then, in this time of America's military supremacy around the world (when no danger is clear and present enough to enact our total destruction), in this era of seemingly irreconcilable rhetoric and clear societal, moral, and religious divergence, to conclude with this chapter of our experiment and, as the Union of all States is no longer absolutely necessary for the basic preservation of our nation, to allow those portions that wish to pursue their own course to secede.

  Since our country's inception, we have added a good number of states, in locations sometimes far-flung from our original borders, states that by their isolation are seen even now as distant lands and foreign peoples whose primary binding characteristic is the feeble, cancer-like presence of the homogenized corporate retail location. In the interest of DomesticTranquility, it would be better to allow those who wished to establish a socially conservative nation based on a particular religion where they might better keep the ignorant in Fear, a place where the individual might not have the right to decide for herself how to affect her body (by tattoo, weight-loss, or abortion), where the benefits of the joining of individuals in marriage or civil union would be bestowed only according to the writings of a specific religious text (and not to homosexuals or to couples of different hues), where a specific language might be declared (the USA haveno official language), and where a specific system of beliefs might be recognized by all, unanimously, as the state religion.

  Perhaps the citizens of America should be asked directly if they feel that these two clearly divergent populations should become separate nations, an official poll to gauge the possibility of such a split, even an outright vote for their fragmentation and reintegration as separate nations according to the wishes of the respective majorities. (These new nations would have to be well-established, sovereign states with clearly demarcated borders, their constitutions well-written, with provisions in place for the unobstructed movement of goods and people between them, especially people who decide, within a set amount of time, that they had made a mistake and would like to switch nations.)

  The essence of liberty that flowered in America and in the world during the 1960s was stamped out in this country for a number of reasons, among them conservatism, Fear of the Unknown, war-mongering, and racism. Chief among these reasons, however, was the passage of legislation prohibiting the use, possession, and distribution of mood altering substances such as marijuana, legislation that to this day continues to violate the liberty of the American People by restricting their ability to obtain and use legally those substances that they deem would best assist them in their pursuit of Happiness.

  Until such time as the citizens of America are granted their constitutional rights to life, liberty, and property; until such time as their right to abort unwanted fetuses and to use whichever substance they decide are best and to marry whomever they please; until such time as the citizens are entrusted fully with their unalienable right to choose for themselves how best to lead their lives and they regain the right to pursue their Happiness as they decide is best; until that time, liberty does not abide in these United States, and the rights enumerated in the Constitution are null and void. (If any one portion of the Constitution becomes null and void, the entire Constitution must be considered null and void.)

  Certain constitutional protections (against unwarranted searches and seizures) continue to be violated courtesy of the Patriot Act. Similarly, enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act violates the individual's fifth and fourteenth Amendment right to property, because her body is her only true property, and she can do with her property whatever she wants, so long as she is not harming anyone else's property. Since some of the most fundamental rights and protections our Constitution was supposed to have provided continue to be withheld from the American people, we must assume that our Constitution is no longer functioning as intended, that is has been so abused and mocked that it more resembles a nice thing to read on a sunny afternoon than a bedrock legal document. With this our finest document already torn, tattered, and violated, with our most basic rights and protections reduced to the theoretical, we would do well to allow those seeking liberty to break off from those seeking to cling fearfully to the mistakes of the past, that a new Union based solidly on the principles set forth by our nation's forefathers might be formed, a new nation that would not rest until the Blessings of Liberty were guaranteed to ourselves and our Posterity, equally and without undue restriction.

  Let the religious zealots thump their holy books and legislate according to their morality, in their own nation, while they funnel the wealth of their people into the pockets of the richest one percent. We rational, progressive, compassionate few, we who yearn for liberty, we who would like to affect our bodies and to pursue our Happiness as we see fit, our Safety protected by the might of the Declaration, our rights as enumerated in the Constitution immutable and unalienable now, and forever.

  Only through constant vigilance and rational foresight can we ensure Liberty and Justice for all. Stand up. Speak out. Demand your constitutional rights. While this struggle may seem nearly over, we have not yet begun to fight.

Ultima Ratio Regum - 場黑麥 John Paul Roggenkamp

on safety vs. liberty

  In America today, we face a simple choice: whether to fight for our freedom or to continue on our present course, and sacrifice freedom to the hollow lie of false security. (By false security I mean the efforts by our government to control the lives the American People by restricting what they do to their bodies, and by punishing them for pursuing Happiness or for exercising Liberty, efforts that mock and destroy the tender concept of freedom by trying to make it one-size-fits-all, when it is a messy, individualistic affair too easily ruined through external tampering.)

  We, the People of America, are not a free people. We have allowed our freedom to be taken from us. We have allowed, for forty (40) years, the Controlled Substances Act to destroy our freedom to choose what to do with our own bodies (thankfully, it is not yet illegal to get tattooed, or to undergo elective surgery, two activities that alter the body just as much as recreational drug use). We have allowed the Patriot Act to do violence to the Constitution, and to rob us of our once inalienable protections. We have allowed our police to focus on sidestepping our Constitutional protections (by letting them brow-beat citizens into body and property searches, and by letting the police lie, cheat, and steal in order to bust criminals engaged in non-violent “crimes”), a focus that negates police effectiveness and that forces them daily to violate their most sacred of oaths, as they have all sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. (A police officer actively involved in persuading a citizen to give up his Constitutional protections is actively involved in destroying the U.S. Constitution.)

  We have allowed all these things to happen because we have allowed Fear into our hearts. When, in the early Seventies, we saw our crime rates rise, we blamed it solely on drug-use, and banned the use of certain substances (thereby robbing the American people of the right to dispose of their bodies any way they wanted), while not banning certain other substances – alcohol and cigarettes – substances that have maimed and murdered millions of America's sons and daughters. When faced with the consequences of our failed foreign policies (09SEP2011), we gave up our freedom, preferring to have our liberty violated by persons within our own government rather than to have it violated from without. For these reasons, we are no longer a free People. For these reasons, ours is no longer the land of the free (for Liberty knows few personal restrictions), nor is it the home of the brave (for the pure of heart rejoice always in their impending death: they fear only cowardice).

  In concurrence with the erosion of America's common dream, we have seen the erosion of our most basic and fundamental concepts. Our patriotism has been supplanted by conspicuous flag-waving and banner-hanging (very often in blatant violation of the code governing the treatment of the flag of the United States of America). Our secular morality has been high-jacked by the forces of religious conservatism (to become xenophobic proxy-racism). Gone are the days when we were told to fear nothing but fear itself: now we are told exactly what to fear, and that we have a whole lot more to fear that we ever thought we were capable of being afraid of. Our once-great traditions of story-telling and gung-ho, can-do enthusiasm have been tongue-lashed out of us by our corporate overlords; they have shriveled to almost nothing before the inexorable, terrible beauty of television.

  Brothers. Sisters. Fellow New Guards for our future Security. Now is the time for your voices to be heard. Now is the time to recover for our Posterity the promise of this land, and to free our constitutionally-guaranteed Liberty from the shackles of repression, religion, and fear.

  Freedom, much like democracy, is always messy: its expression will hurt someone else's feelings, every time. But as much sacrifice as freedom demands, it repays tenfold with deep, abiding confidence, with true and tender self-respect. So take a chance, and take your opinions known: it does not matter what you have to say, merely that you are saying it out loud, in full accordance with your Constitutional rights.

  It is easier, far easier, not to fight for the Blessings of Liberty that the Constitution guarantees: all we have to do is continue to do nothing, to let the enemies of freedom take from us the few liberties we have left.

  This cannot come to pass. Stand up. Speak out. Challenge everything.


p.s. congratulations to the United States Marine Corps for two hundred thirty six years of defending the liberty of the American people from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Libertatem Defendendam - 場黑麥 John Paul Roggenkamp

daisy cutter

Lady Liberty, tunic askew and breast revealed, stepping inadvertently with right foot on a snake, standing in a clear-cut forest, balances on a shoulder-beam (whose left side is cracked and banded with irons) the symbols of money and war against the symbols of peace and the Declaration of Independence. She is trying to lift the heavy symbols with her left hand, while her right hand has lost its grip. A tiny man (representing the richest 1% of the American population) is sawing through the beam on the right side, thus attempting to cut off the symbols of peace and the Declaration of Independence. Above all the words: DAISY CUTTER

on additional amendment

  The rights of the American People are being violated by those sworn to uphold them. Not having foreseen the recent ascendancy of the federal government over the states (the potential for which was, however, well known and widely debated at the time), the drafters of our Constitution, when amending that document to flesh out the protections essential to the unimpeded and unfettered pursuit of Happiness, failed to incorporate protections necessary to securing fully the Blessings of Liberty to each and every individual and maintaining those protections ad infinitum. In the XIV Amendment, it is written that, “No State [...] shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” (see here)
  While this amendment might have protected the People from overreaches by the individual states (it has failed, as the populations of the various states are continually restricted in the execution of their liberty), it does not protect us from overreaches by the federal government. In order to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, and to ensure that the individual can decide how best to dispose of the only property (that being her body) without which her life is impossible, the Constitution must be further amended to protect her from indiscriminate and unjust actions by the federal government, against which she currently has little recourse.
  Put simply, the XIV Amendment must be altered to read, “No Government shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” An alteration to this affect (coupled with an aggressive prosecution of the newly altered amendment) would fulfill at least one of the purposes of government as defined in the preamble to the Constitution by securing for the individual, fully and unconditionally, the Blessings of Liberty (liberty means he has the right to decide for himself how best to lead his life), so long as it is made clear to him that he may not not infringe in any way upon the life, liberty, or property of any other person (the flip-side of the coin of liberty that any rational, free-thinking individual will readily understand).
  Therefore, unless you have been found guilty by a jury of your peers and ordered by a judicial body (convened to try your case) not to engage in certain specifically enumerated activities (such as consuming drugs in private or growing them for your own use, getting an abortion, gaining or losing weight, getting tattooed, or any other such things that affect your body and your body alone), you have the constitutional right to do any and all of these things. The only possible justification that the federal government might bring for its blanket prohibitions on certain activities and altered states of consciousness is perhaps that while the Constitution prohibits depriving “any person” of liberty or property, it does not expressly prohibit depriving the entire American population of the unalienable Rights set forth in both of our founding documents.
  I hereby call upon the federal government to cease with all policies that infringe upon the right of the individual to do to herself and to her body as she pleases so long as she is not infringing demonstrably upon the life, liberty, or property of any other person or persons. The Declaration of Independence states that the purpose of the government of the United States of America is bring about the Safety and Happiness of the People. Until the People are granted unconditional liberty, they cannot ever be truly Happy; until they are granted the freedom to choose for themselves how best to lead their lives, and they are allowed to affect their bodies as they see fit, they are little better off, and just as likely to rebel, as those fine proud Americans who once rose up and threw off the mantle of a government that had lost sight of its duty to those it purported to represent.
  Join me in the effort to free the American People from under the yoke of repression; write to your representative in Congress and demand that she or he join in your fight for full, unconditional liberty. Over the last forty years, the People, by continuing to consume whichever drugs they desired, have sent a message to the federal government: We will decide for ourselves how best to lead our lives, and we will not renounce our liberty just because you have declared a War on those Drugs we have as much of a right to consume as we do to partake of alcohol, caffeine, and nicotine.

Ultima Ratio Regum - 場黑麥 John Paul Roggenkamp

on the necessity of Union

  When the Declaration of Independence was written, and its sister document, the Constitution, the need for Union among the States was great. Joined in Union, the States proved better able to effect their independence, and to stand strong collectively, a dozen-odd entities working together against the many pressures that faced our young nation as it fought to make a place for itself in the world and to prove that its shockingly progressive ideals had merit.

  Then, halfway through the 19^th century, divergent forces and interests among the States compelled them to split apart in the attempt to form two separate nations, one seeking to maintain large numbers of slaves, the other seeking to maintain the Union. Whole populations that no longer felt that they should be following the same path rose up in conflict, two seemingly foreign peoples that understood that they had grown simply too far apart in thought and in method to be able to stay together. In those times of relative national weakness and persistent internal turmoil, the Union held; it has held through two world wars, scores of other undeclared wars, and rapid and widespread cultural and societal transformations both here and abroad.

  Today, however, we have witnessed the ascendancy of a federal supremacy over the states, and within that supremacy the elevation of the executive branch (in clear violation of the checks and balances built into the Constitution), as well as growing divergences between the citizens who live in roughly the same areas as those that split asunder in the 1860s. Two loose but still recognizable camps have formed in this nation, with millions of voters hovering at varying degrees around the edges of each, one camp calling for more punitive and dogmatic responses to our problems, a camp that relies on the gullibility of the masses for the propagation of its conservative views on religion and society, the other camp one that strives at least superficially for rational debate, the reinstatement of the constitutional right to liberty, and a more compassionate and socialistic view of the role that government and society must play in the elevation of the American People and the bringing about of Their Safety and Happiness. (It would be convenient to suppose that I am here referring to Republicans and Democrats respectively, but as these parties have become the necessary repositories of most anyone seeking political office, their ranks are as varied in their opinions as is the greater population, which is split roughly between liberals and conservatives, i.e. between those who seek to propagate liberty through rational debate and those who seek to maintain the status quo through Fear Of The Unknown and an inflexible mind-set. In my opinion, debate and rational thinking are essential to the propagation of liberty, as the concept of liberty presupposes that the individual is capable of deciding for himself how best to lead his life; it demands of him that he understands the consequences of his actions and allows him to decide to live a virtuous life devoid of privations against the life, liberty, or property of his fellow persons.)

  Perhaps it would be best, then, in this time of America's military supremacy around the world (when no danger is clear and present enough to enact its total destruction), in this era of seemingly irreconcilable rhetoric and clear societal, moral, and religious divergence, to conclude with this chapter of our experiment and, as the Union of all States is no longer absolutely necessary for the basic preservation of our nation, to allow those portions that wish to pursue their own course to secede.

  Since our country's inception, we have added a good number of states, in locations sometimes far-flung from our original borders, that by their isolation are seen even now as foreign and distant lands and peoples whose primary binding characteristic is the feeble footprint of the homogenized corporate retail location. In the interest of Domestic Tranquility, it would be better to allow those who wished to establish a religious and socially conservative nation where they might better keep the ignorant in Fear, a place where the individual would not have the right to decide for herself how to affect her body (by tattoo, weight-loss, or abortion), where the benefits of the joining of individuals in marriage or civil union would be bestowed only according to the writings of a specific religious text, where a specific language were declared officially and a specific system of beliefs were recognized by all, unanimously, as the state religion.

  Perhaps the citizens of America should be asked directly if they feel that these two clearly divergent populations should become separate nations, an official poll to gauge the possibility of such a move, even an outright vote for their fragmentation and reintegration as separate nations according to the wishes of the respective majorities. (These new nations would have to be well-established, sovereign states with clearly demarcated borders, their constitutions well-written, with provisions in place for the unobstructed movement of goods and people between them, especially people who decide, within a set amount of time, that they had made a mistake and would like to switch nations.)

  The essence of liberty that flowered in America and in the world during the 1960s was stamped out here for a number of reasons, among them conservatism, Fear of the Unknown, war-mongering, and racism. Chief among these reasons, however, was the passage of legislation prohibiting the use, possession, and distribution of mood altering substances such as marijuana, legislation that to this day continues to violate the liberty of the American People by restricting their ability to obtain legally those substances that they deem would best assist them in their pursuit of Happiness.

  Certain constitutional protections (against unwarranted searches and seizures) continue to be violated courtesy of the Patriot Act. Similarly, enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act violates the individual's right to property (her body is her only true property). Since some of the most fundamental rights and protections our Constitution was supposed to provide continue to be withheld from the American people, we must assume that our Constitution is no longer functioning as intended, that is has morphed from a bedrock legal document into a nice thing to read on a sunny afternoon. With this our finest document already torn, tattered, and violated, with our most basic rights and protections reduced to the theoretical, we would do well to allow those seeking liberty to break off from those seeking to cling fearfully to the mistakes of the past, that a new Union based solidly on the principles set forth by our nation's forefathers might be formed, a new nation that would not rest until the Blessings of Liberty were guaranteed to all equally.

  Let the religious zealots thump their holy books and legislate according to their morality in their own nation while they funnel the wealth of their people into the pockets of the richest one percent. We rational, progressive, compassionate few, we who yearn for liberty, would like to treat our bodies and to pursue our Happiness as we see fit, our Safety protected by the might of the Declaration, our rights as enumerated in the Constitution immutable and unalienable now, and forever.

  Only through constant vigilance and rational foresight can we ensure Liberty and Justice for all. Stand up. Speak out. Demand your constitutional rights. We have not yet begun to fight.