There’s A Huge Difference…Anarchists And Constitutionalists.

Constitution

Anarchist or Constitutionalist….

I continue to see the national media bring up the fringe groups around the country and speak of them as if they were the Tea Party or conservatives.  If you have one half a brain you know there’s a huge difference between Anarchists and Constitutionalists.

Would you say there is a difference between Jeffery Dahmer and Mother Teresa, hot and cold, night and day?  Of course there is.  And the spread is no wider in any of those comparisons than in the one in the title of this article.

Anarchism is a political philosophy which considers the state undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful, and instead promotes a stateless society.  You have never heard, and never will hear, this me or this blog suggest the end of government.  You will continue to hear me promote government…as is dictated by the Constitution of the United States.  You have heard me time and time again praise that document and those who drafted it and the Declaration of Independence as the greatest governmental documents ever drawn.  The Constitution is clear as to the responsibilities of the Federal government, and that’s where I want their participation in every individual citizens life to end.  And there’s the state, the county, and city government, and each has it’s place in the scheme of things, and your life and mine…and the anarchists whether they like it or not.  That’s how this country is run, and is in compliance with the Constitution.

The definition of a Constitutionalist is simple: one who believes in the Constitution.  I don’t believe in a so-called “living” Constitution.  The Constitution is clear, and not open to annual reinterpretation by those who’d like to bend it to their ends and means.  If anything, the Declaration of Independence should be looked upon as the original intent of government.  In fact, other than the first ten Amendments, the Bill of Rights, I don’t think the others were necessary.  Women’s vote…covered in the original Constitution, and Declaration of Independence, and the nineteenth Amendment was only a restatement of the simple and eloquent “all men are created equal.”  And you have to realize that “men” in that time referred to the human race without relation to gender.  And each of the other following Amendments, other than those ten, were equally drawn and passed only to clarify, and the clarification was really unnecessary.  Did the Constitution and Declaration need to be reinterpreted?  No, they just needed to be interpreted correctly and without prejudice in the first instance.  The writing is there, and clear.

Don’t let the media and those who continue to try and circumvent the Constitution muddy the waters with rhetoric, I, and most of you, only want the government to adhere to the Constitution.

There will always be fringe groups, but they aren’t those in the mainstream of American life…those who still believe that all men are created equal, and in the Constitution.

Leave a Reply