One of the sillier ideas floating around out there is this idea that the “Tea Party Patriots” and the “Ron Paul Republicans” have that the constitution will somehow save them from the state, or can be used to shrink the state. That is a really empty thing to believe. The constitution is exactly what George Bush said it was. A goddamned piece of paper. At least, that’s all anyone can prove about it.
The constitution is NOT written in clear language. It’s actually quite fuzzy, to the extent I even know what is in there. The only thing I can tell you is that the second amendment was fudged with that line about the “well ordered militia”. Whether or not making that line clearer would have made a difference I don’t know, but I doubt it. But why even base an argument for gun rights on some old piece of paper? I’ll give you an argument right here that is airtight.
You can’t take away people’s guns without sending men after them with guns. So then how the hell can can you say that people don’t have a right to have guns?
Done. No need to refer to the constitution at all. Not that this will mean you get to keep your guns. You are going to lose those anyway. But you may keep your integrity.
You will lose every time by talking about the constitution. Someone with more money, more power, more guns, a fancier degree and a black robe is going to beat you at that game every time. You will be lucky if they don’t tell a man in a blue costume to actually beat you while they’re at it.
When you use the constitution as the principle you work from you are defeating yourself. If you play poli-tricks at all in hopes of shrinking the state or making the state “better” you are defeating yourself. These are all games and traps the state has set up for you. They play these games far better than you ever will be able to, and they laugh at you and mock you in your futile efforts to play along. Do you think the Wise Latina has any intention of letting you keep your guns, no matter what some old piece of paper says? She doesn’t.
The constitution is supposedly the founding document of this particular state. So it either caused or was powerless to stop the state that exists now from forming. Why the hell would “going back” to it create a different outcome next time? The state is perfectly capable of finding some “interpretation” of the constitution that justifies whatever it wants to do. Why is your interpretation any better? And if you use the constitution as your first principle, how the hell can you say they are wrong?
Try an empirical test. Next time you get a traffic ticket, go to the man or woman in the black robe and try to present your own legal argument as to why you do not have to pay that ticket. Watch the man or woman in the black robe laugh at you. It is easy enough to find some loophole in the laws that you could use. People do it with tax laws all the time, and I’m sure that their arguments are totally right, assuming that the state actually follows some sort of set of rules. If you can’t get some piss-ant thief calling himself a “traffic court judge” to accept your argument over a ticket, why the hell would the people that call themselves “the supreme court” accept anything you have to say about the constitution?
The important thing to remember is that the state operates on the principle of force, not law. The laws are just window dressing for plunder. Don’t fall into the trap of trying to use anything the state has written or created against the state. You will lose, and in doing so you will actually be endorsing the state as some kind of legitimate entity and adding to it’s power. You will be saying that it is the job of the state to solve the problem of the state. So how then can you complain when the state chooses not to end itself? You left it up to them!
Ask yourself this: what the hell is a law anyway? Most people can’t answer that. You’d be surprised how many people that work for the state can’t answer that. I’ll bet the Wise Latina herself can’t answer that. But it doesn’t matter. That’s NOT what the state is about.
Note: This post is mainly directed at the Ron Paul people, for whom I have some sympathy since I was briefly taken in by the whole Ron Paul thing. The “tea party” people are a different story. They are a bunch of militaristic, neocon, statist jerks and when the shit hits the fan they will be the first ones crying for fascism. They are crying for it already. The idea that these animals are interested in your freedom is a joke.